Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Borowski case first establishes Borowski's status and right to represent the unborn in his action to have the provisions of the Criminal Code concerning abortion declared a violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The author, Borowski's lawyer, then presents his arguments in favor of the rights of the unborn: Sections 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter, confirm his rights by guaranteeing the right of “everyone” to “life, liberty and security” and by protecting his against “discrimination based upon mental or physical disabilities”. In spite of the testimonies of the world's outstanding authorities in the fields of perinatology, neonatalogy, embryology, gynecology, neurosurgery and abortion, the Trial court, turning to Section 206 of the Criminal Code, concluded that until a child leaves the body of his or her mother in a living state, he or she is not a human being. Moreover, the unborn is not “someone” encompassed in the word “everyone” of Section 7 of the Charter. English and Canadian jurisprudence is then reviewed by the author. He proceeds to analyze the impact of important decisions rendered in Spain, West-Germany and the United States and examines the consequences of the Morgentaler decision.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".