Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this book review, posted in November 2014 on H-Law (H-Net Reviews in the Humanities & Social Sciences), Professor Wildenthal reviews Barry L. Strayer's 2013 book, Canada's Constitutional Revolution (University of Alberta Press). Judge Strayer wrote his book mainly as an inside account of the process leading up to Canada's patriation of its national constitution from the United Kingdom in 1982. Strayer also touches on various related aspects of his distinguished career as a law professor, provincial and federal government attorney (he became a top member of Prime Minister Trudeau's legal team), and Canadian federal judge.This review praises the erudition and lively, entertaining style of Strayer's book, which makes an important contribution to understanding Canada's constitutional history and specifically, the origins and importance of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms adopted in 1982.Strayer recounts some fascinating history, for example, about the battle to include some protections for aboriginal (i.e., indigenous, Native, First Nations) rights in the Canadian Constitution.Among other points, though somewhat aside from the main theme of the book, the review praises the interest and relevance for Americans of Strayer's recounting of the episode (early in his career) by which his native province, Saskatchewan, adopted universal public health insurance during the 1960s, leading to the national adoption of Canada's famous single-payer public health insurance system.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.003 |
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".