MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2295120408 · doi:10.11575/prism/34028

Environmental Class Actions for Historical Contamination: Smith v. Inco Limited 2013

2013· article· en· W2295120408 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeological Research and Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProperty (philosophy)HarmNuisanceClass (philosophy)Law and economicsLawProperty valueCommon propertyProperty rightsEconomicsPolitical scienceComputer sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smith v. Inco Ltd is a noteworthy environmental law case for several reasons, not the least of which it is that it is the first environmental class action lawsuit to proceed through a trial and appeal in a common law province in Canada. The case, which took more than a decade to be decided, alleged that continuous tortious behaviour on the part of mining giant Inco Ltd commencing almost a century earlier had adversely affected a large class of landowners' property values. The case evolved through several styles of cause and claims that led to many trips to the courthouse on a wide assortment of intractably contested legal issues. Although the various procedural issues contribute in their own ways to the development of the law, particularly in respect of class action proceedings, this Comment is focused on analysis of the substantive issues in the case.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.170 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it