MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2383772182

Canada's Conflicted Approach to International Child Abduction

2016· article· en· W2383772182 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Martha Bailey

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Criminal Justice and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventionConvention on the Rights of the ChildRefugeeInternational lawImmigrationLawPolitical scienceChild custodyHuman rights
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada’s inconsistent approach to international child abduction flows from the competing legal regimes that are applied to the problem. A more coherent approach to international child abduction will require greater integration and cooperation among those applying family law, criminal law, and immigration and refugee law within Canada, and also among parties to the Hague Convention. More integration and cooperation will better enable states to achieve the overarching goal of protecting the rights and interests of children involved in cases of international abduction.

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)0.019
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0130.020
Scholarly communication0.0130.003
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicEuropean Criminal Justice and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207