MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013062100

Natural Law and the Nature of Law: A Response to Commentators

2019· article· en· W3013062100 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jonathan Crowe

Bibliographic record

VenueBond University Research Portal (Bond University) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLaw in Society and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFlinders UniversityMonash UniversityMenzies Centre for Australian Studies, King's College London, University of LondonUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUniversity of TorontoMacquarie UniversityUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of OxfordYork UniversityBond UniversityGeorgetown University
KeywordsLawNatural lawFlourishingNatural orderNatural (archaeology)Philosophy of lawPolitical sciencePositive lawComparative lawPoliticsPrivate lawBlack letter lawSociologyHistoryPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I am grateful to the Executive Committee of the Australasian Society of Legal Philosophy for choosing Natural Law and the Nature of Law as the subject of this year’s book symposium.1 And, most of all, I would like to thank the three commentators for reading my book and providing such rich, generous and thoughtprovoking responses. There is no scope here to do full justice to the depth of their comments, and some interesting points will inevitably be left undiscussed. My aim, however, is to treat their remarks as a series of invitations that I will do my best to accept, rather than decline.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.136
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.136
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0200.028
Scholarly communication0.0140.023
Open science0.0100.011
Research integrity0.0660.077
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.281 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBond University Research Portal (Bond University)Same topicLaw in Society and CultureFrench-language works237,207