Опыт Канады в правовом регулировании доступа к информации
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
Problem this article examines the issues of legal regulation of access to information in Canada. The author’s research is based on the materials of foreign scientists studying the issues of transparency, freedom of information and the right of access to information P. Thomas, A. Roberts, K. Douglas, D. Lithwik etc., as well as court decisions and materials of the official websites of the relevant public authorities of Canada. Materials and methods The author has used scientific methods of knowledge: analysis, comparison, legal modeling, as well as historical and legal and comparative legal methods. Conclusions The author concluded that experience of Canada in legal regulation of access to information is necessary for the introduction of corresponding amendments to the Russian legislation. Practical implications conclusions and recommendations can be used in efforts to improve legislation on access to information, in further research on this issue, as well as in the educational process. Originality/value materials of the article are intended for scientists studying the issues of the access to information, practitioners as well as students and postgraduate students of higher educational institutions.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.030 |
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