Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the age of polarized political discourse in the United States, American citizens and judicial elites could learn from examining the leadership style of Chief Justice McLachlin, who led the Canadian Supreme Court from 2000-2017. This lecture will begin by discussing some basic facts about Canada and the Canadian Supreme Court and then use theories of strategic behavior and leadership change to exam-ine patterns of majority voting, opinion authorship, ideological voting, and panel size across the three modern chief justices (1973-2014). While Chief Justice Lamer and Dickson displayed clear patterns of task leadership, Chief Justice McLachlin exhibited both task and social lead-ership patterns, which is highly uncommon. As the first female to lead a common-law high court, these findings are worthy of scholarly atten-tion. She was able to foster a far more collegial and unified court than her predecessors, and her efforts were indicative of a leader who un-derstood the importance of collegiality despite increasing panel sizes and the growing political role of the Court in Canadian society in re-cent years.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".