MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773895286 · doi:10.29173/alr1244

Recent Judicial Decisions of Interest to Energy Lawyers

2017· article· en· W2773895286 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kevin G. Kerr, Ben Rogers, Marita Zouravlioff

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Systems and Judicial Processes
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society of Petroleum GeologistsCalgary Laboratory Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstitutionalityDutyInsolvencyLawJudicial opinionLegislationPolitical scienceCorporate governanceCommon lawJudicial interpretationInterpretation (philosophy)Law and economicsEconomicsBusinessSupreme court

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article summarizes a number of recent judicial decisions of interest to energy lawyers. The authors review and comment on the past year’s case law in several areas including Aboriginal law, contractual interpretation, corporate governance and shareholder rights, employment and labour law, environmental law, utility regulation, constitutional law, and selected developments in civil procedure. Specific topics addressed include the duty to consult, plans of arrangement, the duty of good faith in contractual relations, environmental claims upon insolvency, and the constitutionality of federal climate change legislation. For each case, some background information is given, followed by a brief explanation of the facts, a summary of the decision, and some commentary on the outcome.

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)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.632

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Law ReviewSame topicLegal Systems and Judicial ProcessesFrench-language works237,207