MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W35449792

Virtual Justice and the Rule of Law

2009· article· en· W35449792 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDispute Resolution and Class Actions
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawAdjudicationRule of lawLegislationPolitical scienceComparative lawPublic lawContext (archaeology)Philosophy of lawLaw and economicsSociologyGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the challenges that information and communications technology bring to the rule of law in the context of adjudication. The historical core of the rule of law in the western tradition is first identified as the quest for a government of laws and not of men, a concept which sits most comfortably with legislation as the foremost source of law. The globalisation of the means of conflict resolution which has come with technological evolution is then used to highlight how the state is losing its grip not only on the means of dispute resolution but also on the substantive laws that govern outcomes. The significance of this for legal method is seen as the loss of the centrality of legislation, an increased reliance on the rationality of case law, and the rule of law reassessment that this requires.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.776
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · 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