MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410755619 · doi:10.52783/jier.v5i2.2803

Towards a Tech-Savvy Judiciary: A Comparative Study of Evidentiary Flexibility in India, the UK, US, Canada, and Singapore

2025· article· en· W4410755619 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Himanshu Thakran

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Informatics Education and Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDispute Resolution and Class Actions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Political scienceLawManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 21st century has witnessed a profound digital transformation, fundamentally altering the way individuals communicate, transact, and store information. With the widespread proliferation of devices such as smartphones, laptops, and cloud-based platforms, electronic evidence comprising emails, digital images, chat logs, GPS data, and multimedia files has become indispensable in both civil and criminal litigation. This paper examines the evolving legal treatment of electronic evidence in India, contextualized through a comparative analysis of five common law jurisdictions: the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Singapore, and India.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.923

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.334 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Informatics Education and ResearchSame topicDispute Resolution and Class ActionsFrench-language works237,207