MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2749793581

Implications of the Ktunaxa Nation/Jumbo Valley Case for Religious Freedom Jurisprudence

2016· article· en· W2749793581 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dwight Newman

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupreme courtJurisprudenceReligious freedomCharterLawIndigenousPolitical scienceFreedom of religionIndigenous rightsSociologyHuman rightsEconomic freedom
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ktunaxa Nation case that went to the Supreme Court of Canada (in December 2016) concerning the Jumbo Valley site — or what the community itself calls Qat’muk — is significant to the Indigenous community whose life is affected by whether the development at issue in the case proceeds. As the first Indigenous religious freedom case to be argued at the Supreme Court of Canada under the religious freedom clause in section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it will also have a broader significance to religious freedom jurisprudence generally. Apart from the result of the case, the reasoning of the Court matters immensely. This paper explains why and how the case could have broader implications for religious freedom.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0350.023
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0090.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics→French-language works237,207→