MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W301312037

Book Review: In Search of ‘Bora’s Head’

2009· article· en· W301312037 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lorne Sossin

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiographyWonderHistoryArt historyPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a bust of Bora Laskin situated just outside the entrance to the Bora Laskin Law Library in the Faculty of Law at the University of Toronto. Students at U of T have affectionately appropriated this spot, which they call ‘Bora’s Head,’ and it is a popular gathering place at the law school. I often wonder what the students today think when they come together at Bora’s Head to study for exams or sell tickets for the Law Follies. What does Bora Laskin mean to them? What should he mean to them? In answering this question, I first had to consider what he means to me.I never met Bora Laskin, and yet he has loomed large in my professional life. For this reason, I read Philip Girard’s accessible and engaging biography Bora Laskin: Bringing Law to Life, published in 2005, with more than mere professional interest. That same year, a major conference was hosted by the Law Society of Upper Canada to commemorate Laskin, entitled The Laskin Legacy: A Commemoration of the Life and Contributions of the Right Honourable Bora Laskin, P.C., C.C. A series of essays arising from this conference was published in 2007 under the title The Laskin Legacy: Essays in Commemoration of Chief Justice Bora Laskin. These two examinations of Laskin’s legacy are distinct in a number of ways. Girard has penned a thoroughly researched and sparklingly written biography. The Commemoration, by contrast, brought together those who knew and were touched by Laskin, including former students, law clerks, judicial and academic colleagues, friends, and members of the profession who argued before him. Together, these appraisals of Laskin provide vivid and thought-provoking reflections of the man and his times. This essay is an attempt to assess Laskin’s continuing reach and his impact on Canada's legal community.

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)0.015
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0570.057

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.387 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicLegal Education and Practice Innovations→French-language works237,207→