MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386486512 · doi:10.60082/2817-5069.3896

Assisted Suicide in Canada: Moral, Legal, and Policy Considerations by Travis Dumsday

2023· article· en· W4386486512 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Anita Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueOsgoode Hall law journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterJurisprudenceSupreme courtLawCriminal codePolitical scienceCriminologySociologyCriminal law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA’S (SCC) decision in Carter v Canada (“Carter”) was a landmark moment in Canadian jurisprudence. In Carter, the SCC declared two sections of the Criminal Code to be of no force and effect because the “prohibition on physician assisted dying…deprives a competent adult of such assistance where (1) the person affected clearly consents to the termination of life; and (2) the person has a grievous and irredeemable medical condition…that causes enduring suffering that is intolerable to the individual.” Not only did Carter overturn an earlier decision in Rodriguez v British Columbia (Attorney General) (“Rodriguez”), which had upheld prohibitions on medical assistance in dying (MAID), but Carter was also instrumental in two other aspects of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“Charter”) jurisprudence.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOsgoode Hall law journalSame topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207