MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385512102 · doi:10.60082/2563-8505.1378

R. v. Comeau: A Crack In the Wall?

2020· article· en· W4385512102 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christopher D. Bredt, Ewa Krajewska, Ben Shakinovsky

Bibliographic record

VenueSupreme Court law review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Evidence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPossession (linguistics)CorporationLawEconomic historyHistoryBusinessPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2012, one man’s journey from New Brunswick to Quebec in pursuit of cheap beer sparked a fierce constitutional debate about the role of interprovincial trade in Canada. In a booze run that has since made Canadian legal history, G rard Comeau drove from his home in Tracadie, New Brunswick to the Listiguj First Nation Indian Reserve in Quebec, where alcohol is sold at a cheap price. While there, he stocked up on 15 cases of beer and three bottles of liquor, purchased from three different stores. Unbeknownst to him, Mr. Comeau had been under surveillance in his sojourn into Quebec. When he crossed back over into New Brunswick, Mr. Comeau’s vehicle was intercepted by the RCMP, the alcohol was seized, and Mr. Comeau was charged and fined close to $300 under section 134(b) of the New Brunswick Liquor Control Act, which prohibits possession of liquor not purchased from the New Brunswick Liquor Corporation in excess of a prescribed amount.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0140.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.123
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSupreme Court law reviewSame topicCriminal Law and EvidenceFrench-language works237,207