MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396715380 · doi:10.29173/mlj1301

11(e) Shattered: The Historic and Continued Breaching of Indigenous Persons Right to Reasonable and Timely Bail

2022· article· en· W4396715380 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sean Gallop

Bibliographic record

VenueManitoba Law Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Evidence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousCharterEconomic JusticeJurisprudencePolitical scienceLawCriminologyLaw and economicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

. 11(e) of the Charter states that “any person charged with an offence has the right not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause.” Canada's bail provisions and bail system have historically created barriers to Indigenous peoples accessing reasonable bail in Canada. Recent changes in the bail provisions have attempted to address some of these issues. However, recent jurisprudence has demonstrated that the access to justice issue regarding reasonable bail in Manitoba for Indigenous persons is deep-rooted and multifaceted. This paper will look at the historical access to justice issues regarding reasonable bail for Indigenous peoples, the current attempts to address this issue, and the challenges that still need to be addressed.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManitoba Law JournalSame topicCriminal Law and EvidenceFrench-language works237,207