Bibliographic record
Abstract
My goal in this article is to revisit the defence of diminished responsibility. There are three things that, taken together, suggest to me that a defence of diminished responsibility ought to be made available to certain individuals accused of certain criminal offences. The first is that Canadian criminal law already recognizes a number of defences that reflect ideas about diminished responsibility. The second is that despite the availability of these specific defences to criminal liability, no general defence of diminished responsibility is formally recognized in Canadian criminal law. And the third is that given the Supreme Court of Canada’s ongoing interest in the connection between criminal liability, fundamental justice, and the principle of normative involuntariness, we should take seriously the idea that a defence of diminished responsibility ought to be recognized and made available to certain offenders who suffer from substantial volitional impairments. My paradigmatic example of a volitional impairment is Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD).
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 | 0.018 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.097 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.026 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".