MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W235929184

Literature about illicit drugs: Libraries and the law

2001· article· en· W235929184 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bethan Davies, Ann Curry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information Ethics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFreedom of Expression and Defamation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesFreedom of expressionLegislationLibrary scienceEthnologyLawSociologyPhilosophyHuman rightsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'A. examine les origines de la loi canadienne frappant d'illegalite la litterature promouvant l'utilisation des drogues illicites, dans le contexte de la lutte contre la drogue. Il s'interesse ensuite a l'application pratique de cette loi face a la legislation protegeant la liberte d'expression, et enfin a ses implications sur la gestion des collections dans les bibliotheques. L'enquete realisee sur les fonds d'un certain nombre de bibliotheques publiques canadiennes montre que les collections relatives aux drogues sont de taille reduite et leur disponibilite restreinte.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0240.040
Science and technology studies0.0130.032
Scholarly communication0.0320.023
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0090.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.003

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 head0.305
Teacher spread0.283 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Information EthicsSame topicFreedom of Expression and DefamationFrench-language works237,207