MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3149520621 · doi:10.1017/9781139236249.004

The Biggest Legal Mind We Have

2020· book-chapter· en· W3149520621 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Walters

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal principles and applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawCabinet (room)JurisprudencePoliticsPolitical scienceSociologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Albert Venn Dicey lived from 1835 to 1922. He was a student at Oxford in the late 1850s and held a college fellowship at Oxford from 1860 until his marriage to Elinor Bonham Carter in 1872. He was a barrister who served as counsel to the Inland Revenue before returning to Oxford as the Vinerian Professor of English Law in 1882. In addition to publishing works on constitutional law and conflict of laws, he advocated a series of political positions that became increasingly unpopular during his lifetime, arguing against female suffrage, Irish home rule, and the rise of the modern welfare state. 1 Dicey could be politically dogmatic and uncompromising. His colleague at Oxford, the Professor of Jurisprudence Sir Frederick Pollock, observed that Dicey and his lifelong friend, James Bryce, who would serve as cabinet minister and ambassador to the United States, were ‘university Liberals together’, but Dicey’s ideas ‘remained fixed on all material points while Bryce’s mind was open to the last’. 2 Dicey conceded that he never ceased to be a ‘Mid-Victorian’. 3

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.014
Scholarly communication0.0110.011
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.006

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooks→Same topicLegal principles and applications→French-language works237,207→