MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Editorial Board

2014· paratext· en· W4252950258 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLegal and Constitutional Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisprudenceLawPoliticsState (computer science)SociologyPublishingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Citation (2014), "Editorial Board", Special Issue: Law and the Liberal State (Studies in Law, Politics, and Society, Vol. 65), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. ix-x. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1059-433720140000065015 Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited Copyright © 2014 Emerald Group Publishing Limited Gad Barzilai Political Science University of Washington, USA and Tel Aviv University, Israel Paul Berman Law George Washington University, USA Roger Cotterrell Legal Theory Queen Mary College, University of London, UK Jennifer Culbert Political Science Johns Hopkins University, USA Eve Darian-Smith Global Studies University of California, Santa Barbara, USA David Delaney Law, Jurisprudence, and Social Thought Amherst College, USA Florence Dore English University of North Carolina, USA David Engel Law State University of New York at Buffalo, USA Anthony Farley Law Albany Law School, USA David Garland Law New York University, USA Jonathan Goldberg-Hiller Political Science University of Hawaii, USA Laura Gomez Law University of California, Los Angeles, USA Piyel Haldar Law Birkbeck College University of London, UK Thomas Hilbink Open Society Institute, USA Desmond Manderson Law McGill University, Canada Jennifer Mnookin Law U.C.L.A., USA Laura Beth Nielsen Research Fellow American Bar Foundation, USA Paul Passavant Political Science Hobart and William Smith College, USA Susan Schmeiser Law University of Connecticut, USA Jonathan Simon Jurisprudence and Social Policy University of California, Berkeley, USA Marianna Valverde Criminology University of Toronto, Canada Alison Young Criminology University of Melbourne, Australia Book Chapters Special Issue: Law and the Liberal State Studies in law, politics and society Special Issue: Law and the Liberal State Copyright Page List of Contributors Editorial Board Trading Truth for Legitimacy in the Liberal State: Defending John Rawls’s Pragmatism The Neoliberal State’s Janus Faces of Law Jury Nullification: An Illiberal Defense of Liberty Gays in the Military: Toward a Critical Civil Rights Account Health Care and the Disembodied Politics of American Liberalism Nomos and Native American Narratives: The Duality of Law in the Liberal State

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0150.295

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.189 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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 topicLegal and Constitutional StudiesFrench-language works237,207