MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914981592

Police Intervention Involving Members of the National Assembly: The Importance of Respecting Parliamentary Privilege

2018· article· en· W2914981592 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jacques Chagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian parliamentary review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawDirectivePolitical scienceOpposition (politics)Context (archaeology)Member statesGeneral assemblyUnit (ring theory)European unionPoliticsPsychologyHistoryBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On October 25, 2017, a Member of the National Assembly was arrested by Quebec’s anti-corruption unit (UPAC), whose police officers used a ruse to lure the Member away from the parliamentary precincts in order to arrest him.In the days following the arrest, the President of the National Assembly made a statement in the House on the matter and the Member (who had not been charged on any count whatsoever) addressed his colleagues using the “Personal Explanations” procedure. The Official Opposition House Leader then submitted several requests to the President for directives on parliamentarians’ rights and privileges in the context of police work. In this article, the President recounts the facts surrounding this uncommon event and summarizes the main principles and conclusions of the directive he issued in this matter. The article is based on a speech he gave at the 35th Canadian Presiding Officers’ Conference in Quebec City in January 2018.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
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 score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0160.013
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.321 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian parliamentary reviewSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207