MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224004484 · doi:10.29173/psur255

Canadian Constitution Needs to Be Amended for Canada to Fully Embrace Multiculturalism

2022· article· en· W4224004484 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Tina Kim

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitical Science Undergraduate Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJudicial and Constitutional Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSection (typography)MulticulturalismNeuroscience of multilingualismConstitutionCharterPolitical scienceState (computer science)HierarchyLawPerspective (graphical)IndigenousPosition (finance)SociologyLaw and economicsLinguisticsBusinessPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reform is needed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to remove Section 16 that recognizes French and English as the two official languages. This clause is problematic as bilingualism is not consistent with the goals of multiculturalism. I argue first that bilingualism violates Section 15, which guarantees formal and substantive equality, as it creates a cultural and linguistic hierarchy. Secondly, I argue how bilingualism violates Section 2, specifically the freedom to choose the language to express themselves. I counter-argue my position and state that even if Canada removes Section 16, it is not substantial to protect the fundamental rights of marginalized citizens living in Quebec as Quebec can utilize Section 33 to override the Court. I respond to this perspective and conclude that removing Section 16 remains necessary to equalize the judicial powers of provinces and for Canada to advance forward with Indigenous reconciliation.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0160.005
Scholarly communication0.0120.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0080.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitical Science Undergraduate ReviewSame topicJudicial and Constitutional StudiesFrench-language works237,207