Barriers to the profession : inaction in Ontario, Canada and its consequences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The province of Ontario, Canada, has not had a new law school in almost 40 years. Barriers limiting access to the profession have increased during this time due to a combination of factors discussed in this paper. Diversity within the legal profession has not improved, leading to the perception of a profession dominated by “old white males” whose services are increasingly unaffordable. The paper argues that barriers should be removed and that access to the profession should be greatly increased. La provincia de Ontario, Canada, no ha tenido una nueva facultad de derecho en casi 40 anos. Las barreras que limitan el acceso a la profesion han aumentado durante este tiempo debido a una combinacion de factores que se analizan en este articulo. La diversidad dentro de la abogacia no ha mejorado, lo que lleva a la percepcion de una profesion dominada por viejos hombres blancos, cuyos servicios son cada vez mas prohibitivos. El articulo defiende que se deben eliminar las barreras y que se debe aumentar el acceso a la profesion. DOWNLOAD THIS PAPER FROM SSRN : http://ssrn.com/abstract=2283823
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".