MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978683314

Class Actions in Canada:: The Promise and Reality of Access to Justice

2019· article· en· W2978683314 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDispute Resolution and Class Actions
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClass (philosophy)Economic JusticePolitical scienceSociologyEpistemologyLawPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Class actions have found their way into the fabric of Canada’s civil justice system. Class action legislation has been in place in Ontario for 27 years and in British Columbia and Quebec for 25 and 40 years respectively. Trial and appellate courts have had many opportunities to deal with and develop the law of class actions. Notwithstanding their longevity, however, there is little qualitative and empirical research to test many of the justice claims that are made in favour of, and the criticisms that are levelled at, class actions. This is the unsettled terrain into which Professor Kalajdzic ventures. Her experience in private practice and in the academy, her membership of the Law Foundation of Ontario’s Class Proceedings Committee and the Law Commission of Ontario’s Class Actions Advisory Group, and her numerous publications and research collaborations on class actions topics, make her very well qualified for the task.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.235 · 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