Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book assembles critical contributions on the work of TRS Allan, the Professor Emeritus of Jurisprudence and Public Law at the University of Cambridge, whose leading work in legal and constitutional theory spans almost 45 years. Allan has charted a distinctive path for legal, political, and moral theory and practice and has become a highly significant figure in the UK and in common law/parliamentary systems around the world. His ideas challenge established opinions about constitutional law within these systems as well as established views about the rule of law from more abstract or philosophical perspectives. Allan claims that law and morality find an inherent connection through the rule of law. He argues that there is a connection that flourishes in common law jurisdictions because although Parliament has sovereign legislative powers, its laws gain their full legal meaning only through an interpretive lens. This lens seeks to reconcile sovereign will with legality’s basic moral ideals, especially the idea that law must be general and capable of guiding behaviour and thus respectful of the equality and dignity of its subjects. Allan’s scholarship is powerful yet controversial, and it has inspired 20 leading scholars from the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand to engage with the central themes of his work. By doing so, the contributors help to make that work accessible to a new generation of scholars and students. They also provide a timely framework for engaging in the most important challenges facing our democracies today: how our legal systems do, or do not, honour and respect democracy and therefore legislative sovereignty while at the same time honouring and respecting the rule of law, or the ‘Promise of Legality’.
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 | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.078 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.024 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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".