MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The British Legal Tradition in Canadian Constitutional Law

2017· book-chapter· en· W2966424497 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mark Walters

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2017
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJudicial and Constitutional Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreambleConstitutionAssertionLawSection (typography)Political scienceState (computer science)JurisprudenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter examines the influence of the British legal tradition within Canadian constitutional law. The foundational text of Canada’s constitution, the British North America Act, 1867, was adopted when Canada was still a UK colony, and so it is hardly surprising that this influence would prove to be important—even after Canada emerged as an independent state. Still, the assertion in the preamble to the 1867 Act, that Canada’s constitution is ‘similar in Principle to that of the United Kingdom’, must be approached cautiously. The leading British constitutional scholar A.V. Dicey went so far as to describe this assertion as a piece of ‘official mendacity’. The analysis in Section 2 of this chapter focuses upon institutional structure and design. Here, it will be seen that Dicey was wrong. The analysis in Section 3 of the chapter is on the interpretive ethic or what Dicey called the ‘spirit’ of the constitution.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0130.017
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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