Temerity and Timidity : Lessons from Tanudjaja v. Attorney General (Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the case of Tanudjaja v. Attorney-General (Canada) recedes into the past, its legacy persists as powerful threat to law’s potential to evolve, retaining a critical edge of progressive relevance. Tanudjaja brought extensive and bold argument charging that government action and government inaction were responsible for the evolution and perpetuation of Canada’s housing failure. The challenge was dismissed ; its substantive arguments and evidence shut out without full hearing by a judiciary spooked by novelty. But, the case stands as judicial confirmation of patterns of dismissal of social justice claims under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The significance of these patterns extends broadly — imperilling other claims on the litigation horizon such as emerging assertions of environmental rights.
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 | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.043 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".