MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412766449 · doi:10.5130/ccs.v17.i2.9584

First Nations Litigants Challenge the Hubris of Australian Gas Companies

2025· article· en· W4412766449 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lily O'Neill, Rebekkah Markey-Towler

Bibliographic record

VenueCosmopolitan Civil Societies An Interdisciplinary Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHubrisPolitical scienceBusinessPhilosophyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Australian First Nations people are playing an increasingly important role in climate litigation relating to the approval of greenhouse gas emission (GHG) projects, with several important cases handed down in the last few years. Here we discuss three recent court wins for First Nations litigants against the Australian gas industry. The cases of Tipakalippa, Cooper and Gomeroi highlight three things: (1) the mostly-weak procedural rights First Nations people are forced to use to defend their Country, (2) the hubris of Australian gas companies Santos and Woodside in failing to meet even low procedural law requirements, and (3) the grit of First Nations litigants in fighting for their Country, a fight that all Australians benefit from.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.008
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0150.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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 venueCosmopolitan Civil Societies An Interdisciplinary JournalSame topicCorporate Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207