MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2306256110

The Anti-Discrimination Norm in Human Rights and Charter Law: Nixon V. Vancouver Rape Relief

2004· article· en· W2306256110 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christine Lesley Boyle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLaw, Rights, and Freedoms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman rightsMeaning (existential)CharterLawNorm (philosophy)Political scienceTranssexualInternational human rights lawSociologyGender studiesTransgenderEpistemologyPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper analyzes the issue of whether the human rights concept of discrimination should be consistent with the constitutional meaning. It includes a case study of whether it is discrimination for a women’s group to exclude male to female transsexual persons. The author concludes that given the purposes of human rights law, the meaning of discrimination should be sophisticated enough to address such complex cases where there are equality claims on both sides.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLaw, Rights, and FreedomsFrench-language works237,207