Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Vancouver’s downtown eastside, just down from the Carnegie Community Centre on East Hastings Street, stands Insite. Funded by Vancouver Coastal Health, Insite is a supervised safe injection site for illegal drug users—currently the only such site in North America. It is also at the centre of a heated political and legal struggle over the boundary between health and crime. InPHS Community Services Society v Canada (AG) , the courts have been articulating that struggle in the language of federalism, division of powers and interjurisdictional immunity. Insite, in the courtroom and in the media, raises a host of questions not only about the boundaries of provincial and federal powers, but also about drugs, harm, crime, health, poverty, community, the economy, urban planning, equality, epidemiology, social programming, race, gender, coalition building and municipal politics. Quite the menu of legal, social, and political possibility. In this Issue ofConstitutional Forum, we have drawn together a series of papers that were generated in the context of a pedagogical encounter at the University of Victoria, one that had students and faculty engaged in a collective exploration of the Insite case.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".