MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014818298 · doi:10.3138/ctr.182.005

Acting under Natural Laws

2020· article· en· W3014818298 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Rita Wong, Kimberly A. M. Richards

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLaw in Society and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawSupreme courtContemptImprisonmentPrisonCivil disobediencePolitical scienceState (computer science)SociologyCriminologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On 15 April 2019, Rita Wong, Barry Morris, Mel Lehan, Kyle Farquharson, and Will Offley stood trial in the BC Supreme Court, having been charged with criminal contempt of court for challenging an injunction and blockading the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion on Burnaby Mountain. The five pleaded not guilty, invoking a “defence of necessity” and arguing that the imminent disaster of climate change and decades of government inaction had left them no alternative but to engage in civil disobedience. The BC Supreme Court sentenced Wong to twenty-eight days in prison. The statement Wong offered on 7 June 2019, at her sentencing, draws attention to the powerful performance architecture surrounding the state’s characterization of songs, prayers, and ceremonies as “civil contempt,” “civil disobedience,” and protest. Wong calls for respect for natural and Indigenous law, for a reciprocal relationship with the land, and for taking responsibility.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.015
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.004

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicLaw in Society and CultureFrench-language works237,207