MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902949863 · doi:10.3138/chr.2017-0122

Determining the Punishment of Sex Criminals in Confederation-Era Canada: A Matter of National Policy

2018· article· en· W2902949863 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Carolyn Strange

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Historical Review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominionLegislatureLawDiscretionPunishment (psychology)Criminal justicePolitical scienceCriminal law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Criminal justice was a critical component of nation building, which culminated in Canada’s adoption of a federal Criminal Code in 1892. However, the connections between criminal law reform and the Dominion’s fortunes began in 1869, when penal policy was first formulated and debated on a national stage. At that point, the mandatory sentence of death applied to rape and carnal knowledge of a girl under ten years of age. This article analyzes why and how Canada’s early harsh stance, promoted by John A. Macdonald, gave way, within a decade, to milder penalties. It argues that existing explanations, which focus on the “civilization” of punishment and the racist character of penal policy, must be augmented by an analysis of regional tensions, clashes between the judiciary and the legislature, and the factors at play in individual capital cases (twenty-six in total, from 1867–77). Executive discretion, while constitutional, ultimately proved to be a liability in the broader project of nation building.

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)0.004
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0120.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Historical ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207