Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is dedicated to class actions and class litigation in Canada. Initially evolved from legislative sources of England and the USA, class litigation in Canada has received independent and original development. The profound reform in Ontario that took place in July 2020 made significant amendments to Class Proceedings Act, 1992, which reflect the latest achievements in the field of class litigation. The latest changes in this Act are analysed in the article. Moreover, the following questions are raised: certification and authorisation as class proceedings, necessary to confirm the group for class action, its multiplicity, necessary to form the class action, questions of preferability of group procedure (predominance and superiority) and native language in class litigation. Special point of research is question of costs in class litigation, which has peculiar features in Canadian class action law. They consist in refusal to compensate the judicial costs or in compensation by third-party investor company or by the state (state funds). These approaches offer a fresh look at the problem of compensation of judicial costs in class litigation. The experience of Canada can be used in certain boundaries in Russia.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.037 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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".