MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902728544

ФІСКАЛЬНІ ОРГАНИ КАНАДИ: ПРАВОВІ ЗАСАДИ ОРГАНІЗАЦІЇ ТА ДІЯЛЬНОСТІ

2018· article· uk· W2902728544 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

VenueВісник Харківського національного університету імені В. Н. Каразіна. Серія «Право» · 2018
Typearticle
Languageuk
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Policy Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsState (computer science)Function (biology)Political scienceBusinessEconomic policyLaw and economicsEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

the article provides a legal study of the place and role of fiscal bodies in the state apparatus of Canada. The most significant signs characterizing the modern legal status and development tendencies of the fiscal bodies of Canada are revealed, as well as general and specific signs in the target, competency and organizational elements of the legal status of the fiscal bodies of this country. It is noted that the fiscal function in Canada is divided between the tax and customs services, and their functions sometimes go far beyond taxation or customs.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.583
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.008
Science and technology studies0.0080.011
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0090.003
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.063

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.373 · 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