MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527168362 · doi:10.60082/2817-5069.1332

Prolegomenon to an Intellectual History of Administrative Law in the Twentieth Century: The Case of John Willis and Canadian Administrative Law

2005· article· en· W2527168362 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Michael Taggart

Bibliographic record

VenueOsgoode Hall law journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLaw in Society and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHarvard University
KeywordsLegal historyLawIntellectual historyContext (archaeology)Administrative lawComparative lawWork (physics)Political scienceSociologyHistoryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intellectual legal history-the history of ideas--of modern administrative law has yet to be written. The first part of this article suggests that one way to approach this necessary task is to posit the writings of leading administrative law thinkers in the context of cases, controversies, doctrines, events, and movements throughout the twentieth century. The work of pioneer administrative lawyer John Willis is used to exemplify this type of contextualized intellectual legal history. The second part of this article seeks to gauge Willis's influence on the development of Canadian administrative law.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.769

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOsgoode Hall law journalSame topicLaw in Society and CultureFrench-language works237,207