The Independence of the Judiciary and Some of Its Enemies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The public response to the UK Supreme Court’s decisions in Miller and Cherry invites reflection on the independence of the judiciary. Three questions are pertinent: what do we mean by the independence of the judiciary; how do we secure it; and why should we secure it? At its most basic level, the independence of the judiciary means that the justice system is a separate and independent branch of government. Securing it requires security of tenure and sufficient pay for judges, sufficient resources for the justice system to function properly, and an appointment process that is not unduly politicized. The independence of the judiciary is valuable as a necessary component of democratic government. One of the greatest enemies of the independence of our judiciary is the sheer lack of knowledge – among politicians, the media, and the general public – about the justice system. This makes public education an imperative if we are to preserve it.
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 | 0.015 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.056 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".