MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3189926638 · doi:10.29173/mlj881

An Interview with the Justice Minister and Attorney General of Manitoba

2014· article· en· W3189926638 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrew Swan

Bibliographic record

VenueManitoba Law Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic JusticeLawPolitical sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BPS: The reason we wanted to do this interview is from the process point of view, the past session seemed to be the most remarkable one in about a decade.It was an extraordinary example of the Opposition's ability to put a spanner in the works.The Opposition extended this session, forced the government to make some compromise in terms of scheduling when things would be.Can you give our readers just a background on your rise to House Leader.What the job is about?AS: I was appointed House Leader after the summer of 2013, when there was a cabinet shuffle.The Premier asked if I would take on the role.I was not that surprised as traditionally House Leader has gone along with the role of the Attorney General.I guess they presume that the House Leader who has to be reasoned and negotiate, often those would be qualities you would hope to have in the lawyer who fills the role of the Attorney General.So I wasn't surprised.I had served as the unofficial or backup house leader for Jennifer Howard, who was both house leader and Finance Minister in the last session.So I would spell her off and I would

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)0.008
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.597

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0400.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0120.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.293 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManitoba Law JournalSame topicLegal Education and Practice InnovationsFrench-language works237,207