Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper argues that there is a fundamental conceptual gap between the cases of Doré and Vavilov. This is because both cases are motivated by different conceptions of administrative law. In Vavilov, the paper suggests that the Court melded together two theories of judicial review; a Diceyan theory based on a harmonious understanding of the principles of legislative sovereignty and the Rule of Law; and a “culture of justification” for administrative decision-makers. On the other hand, Doré is motivated by a functionalist understanding of administrative law, in which the expertise of decision- makers is emphasized. The paper explores the doctrinal gap and suggests two ways in which it might be bridged. First, Doré might be recalibrated to bifurcate the standard of review analysis, so that decisions implicating the scope of Charter rights are reviewed more stringently. Second, Vavilov’s justificatory standards might be imported into the Doré context.\nDans le présent article, nous soutenons qu’il existe un fossé conceptuel fondamental entre les arrêts Doré et Vavilov. Cela s’explique par le fait que les deux affaires sont motivées par des conceptions différentes du droit administratif. Dans l’arrêt Vavilov, nous suggérons que la Cour a fusionné deux théories de la révision judiciaire : la théorie du juriste Dicey fondée sur une compréhension harmonieuse des principes de la souveraineté législative et de l’État de droit, et une « culture de la justification » pour les décideurs administratifs. Par ailleurs, l’arrêt Doré se fonde sur une compréhension fonctionnaliste du droit administratif, qui met l’accent sur l’expertise des décideurs. Dans l’article, nous explorons le fossé conceptuel et suggérons deux façons de le combler. D’abord, l’arrêt Doré pourrait être recalibré afin de réorienter le cadre d’analyse de la norme du contrôle judiciaire, de sorte que les décisions impliquant la portée des droits garantis par la Charte soient examinées de façon plus rigoureuse. Deuxièmement, les normes justificatives énoncées dans l’arrêt Vavilov pourraient être importées dans le contexte de l’arrêt Doré.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.041 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".