Bibliographic record
Abstract
225 Human rights — Inhuman treatment — Protection of fundamental human rights when Canadian officers operating abroad — Requirement that Canadian officials follow foreign laws and procedures — Comity — Whether foreign procedures violating fundamental human rights — Whether Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms applicable extraterritorially — Canadian officials interviewing Canadian national detained at Guantánamo Bay — National subjected to sleep deprivation by United States authorities — Whether engaging responsibility of Canada — Convention against Torture, 1984 — Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 — Remedies Relationship of international law and municipal law — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms — Interpretation and application — Interpretation of Section 32(1) of Charter — Jurisdictional scope — Extraterritorial application — Canada’s obligations under international law — Canadian national detained at Guantánamo Bay — Whether Charter of Rights and Freedoms applicable to extent of Canadian participation in detention and proposed trial — Remedies for violation of Charter rights — Conduct of foreign relations by the Government — Justiciability — Whether appropriate for Court to order that Government request United States authorities to repatriate Canadian national detained at Guantánamo Bay War and armed conflict — Combatants — Detention and trial of enemy combatants — Detention of persons captured in Afghanistan conflict — Guantánamo Bay — Whether detention and proposed trial by military commission contrary to international law — The law of Canada
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.307 | 0.128 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".