The Impact of the United Nations Human Rights Treaties on the Domestic Level in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction to Human Rights in CanadaThe Dominion of Canada was formed through the British North America Act, 1867 and was recognized as a fully sovereign state in 1931 with the enactment of the Statute of Westminster by the UK Parliament.1 Roughly half a century later the Constitution Act, 1982 'patriated and Canadianized' the British North America Act.2The most recognised part of the Constitution Act is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter) which, for the first time, provided for a 'constitutional bill of rights' for Canada.3Since its adoption the Charter has become recognised around the world, particularly in the common law, as a model document for the protection of rights and freedoms.4The Charter has led to considerable litigation, with virtually no area of Canadian law left untouched by this scrutiny.A number of institutions are responsible for the monitoring and implementation of human rights in Canada.The Department of Justice is responsible for ensuring that federal Bills are consistent with Canada's human rights 1 Government of Canada, 'Anniversary of the Statute of Westminster' (19 October 2017) accessed 18 February 2019. 2 Michael D Behiels, 'The making of a deal: Trudeau, patriation and the Charter' Policy Options (1 December 2011) accessed 18 February 2019.
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.002 |
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.
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".