MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Politics of Constitutional Law

2017· book-chapter· en· W2965375933 on OpenAlexaffabout
Allan C. Hutchinson

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2017
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJudicial and Constitutional Studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterPoliticsPolitical scienceLawDemocracyJurisprudenceIdeologyConstitutionGovernment (linguistics)Law and economicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract After almost 25 years of jurisprudence under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, many of the fears expressed by critics of the Charter have come to pass—judicial review under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms operates as an institutional device to curb more than advance democratic politics and to entrench more than challenge a conservative ideology. The Charter is indeed a potent political weapon, but one that has been and continues to be used to benefit vested interests in society and to debilitate further an already imperfect democratic process of government. For such critics, whether or not that was the intention of its proponents and drafters is beside the point. Indeed, despite some of the best intentions of the ‘Charter-party’, the courts have not delivered on the touted democratic promise of the Charter. This chapter canvasses different critical challenges to the Charter.

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)0.006
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.052
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicJudicial and Constitutional StudiesFrench-language works237,207