MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892084532 · doi:10.29173/mlj788

You Must Learn to See Life Steady and Whole: Ivan Cleveland Rand and Legal Education

2010· article· en· W2892084532 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ian W. Holloway

Bibliographic record

VenueManitoba Law Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHermeneutics and Narrative Identity
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGerontologyPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To understand properly Ivan Rand's views on legal education, just as to understand properly his jurisprudence, it is critical to appreciate that he was born a Victorian and came of age an Edwardian.He came to national prominence in the Atomic Age -in the middle part of the twentieth century -but he was born in 1884, in the midst of the Mahdi's Rebellion in the Sudan and a year before the Riel Rebellion in the old Red River Territory.His birth took place in the same year that the British Parliament enacted the Third Reform Bill, 1 and only two years after the Married Women's Property Act came into force.2 Rand was sixteen when Queen Victoria died and, while old enough to have enlisted in the Canadian battalions that fought in the Boer War, he was too old to serve in the First World War.He was thirty years of age when the "Guns of August" started and almost thirty-five when they fell silent in November 1918.To consider Ivan Rand in this context can seem not a little startling, for we -at least those of us who are not students of the political history of the Maritime Provinces or of the Canadian National Railway -tend to think of him in terms of

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0200.020
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManitoba Law JournalSame topicHermeneutics and Narrative IdentityFrench-language works237,207