MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Turning Feminist Judgments into Jurisprudence

2018· article· en· W2907449402 on OpenAlexaffabout
Denise G. Réaume

Bibliographic record

VenueOñati Socio-legal Series · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisprudenceTribunalHumanitiesContext (archaeology)Argument (complex analysis)Constitutional courtPolitical scienceLawSociologyPhilosophyHistoryConstitution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Women’s Court of Canada project is unique in having chosen to focus its rewriting efforts in a specific area of law – constitutional equality cases. This strategy permits an assessment of the WCC jurisprudence to see if it yields a competing ‘theory’ of equality rights that might be used to systematically critique the real jurisprudence and perhaps produce lines of argument capable of redirecting the real law. This effort reveals the pervasive importance of attention to and representation of context to bringing to life the abstract commitments of an account of substantive equality. While not a new discovery, this demonstration of the work context can do across an array of linked cases is illuminating.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.302 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOñati Socio-legal SeriesSame topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207