MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528829189

Bending in the Breeze: American Class Actions in the Twenty-First Century

2016· article· en· W2528829189 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDispute Resolution and Class Actions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClass actionMillerPlaintiffClass (philosophy)DemiseAction (physics)Face (sociological concept)EnthusiasmLawHistorySociologyPolitical scienceEpistemologyPhilosophyPsychologySocial scienceSocial psychologyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is always better to have breeze at your back, but that surely has not recently been case for class action proponents. At risk of overstating, there is certain fin de siecle flavor to current procedural discussions, at least among academics; it seems that several foundational principles of late twentieth century procedural ordering have come under attack in twenty-first century. Although not alone among those principles, class actions have prominent role. Dean Robert Klonoff has recently written of The Decline of Class Actions, and Professor Linda Mullenix has written of Ending Class Actions as We Know Them. Professor Arthur Miller-who was present at creation of modern class action-has suggested that we face the death of aggregate litigation by thousand paper cuts. But he, at least, sees some rays of light that indicate it will survive. It is likely an overstatement to claim that any of these prominent academics foresees imminent demise of American class But as we shall see, lawyers sometimes view things in more apocalyptic terms. At same time, most or all would probably agree with Judge Boyle about increasing headwinds that plaintiffs face.Without questioning in least idea that proponents of class action have suffered some reverses recently, I intend to argue that Professor Miller's optimism about American aggregate litigation is justified. Like Confucius' green reed, class action is likely to bend in breeze and survive current, cold climate. In significant part, this attitude stems from an appreciation of exceptional character of American class actions in particular and American bench and bar in general. As Professor Christopher Hodges of Oxford began his study of European techniques for affording relief in court to groups, lawmakers in Europe sought to avoid a US-style court-based mechanism. And Canadian Professor Janet Walker introduced an international panel on group litigation in Moscow by noting that everyone, at least outside United States, seems also to agree that they do not want to adopt U.S.-style class actions in their legal systems.Against this background, it does not seem that American aggregate litigation in general, and class actions in particular, are in danger of extinction. Indeed, one book published in 2014 on European group litigation worries in its title whether they-compared to American aggregate litigation-are squeaking mice, and Dean Klonoff has recently explained why most nations do not have U.S.-style class actions.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.231 · 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