Australasian law and Canadian statutes in the Nineteenth Century: a study of the movement of colonial legislation between jurisdictions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers two principal areas. The first is an investigation of the extent to \nwhich the various Canadian legislatures in the period 1850 - 1900 drew upon \nlegislation previously enacted in New Zealand or in one of the Australian colonies. \nThe existence of such borrowing has been known for some time but has so far \nreceived only slight scholarly attention – as for example Perry’s investigation of the \nVictorian derivation of the NorthWest Irrigation Act and John McLaren’s study of \nimmigration laws, and primarily as a phenomenon affecting only western Canada. \nThe second part of the enquiry attempts to how legislative precedents from the \nAustralasian colonies came to be used by the Canadian jurisdictions. It attempts to \nassess the data on borrowing from Australasian law in the context of the \ncontemporary attitudes to legislation derived from other colonies, and in particular to \nconsider how this interacted with the primary sources of Canadian colonial law – \nlocal innovation and adaptation or adoption of British law.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it