Bibliographic record
Abstract
PART I: THEORIZING LAW AS A GENDERING PRACTICE 1. Law as a Gendering Practice: An Overview 2. L'intersectionalite: Feminisms in a Divided World (Quebec-Canada) PART II: CONSTRUCTING THE (HETERO)SEXUAL SUBJECT OF LEGAL DISCOURSE 3. Justice and Law: Passion, Power, Prejudice, and So-Called Paedophilia 4. Rape Uncodified: Reconsidering Bill C-49 Amendments to Candian Sexual Assault Laws 5. Victim, Nuisance, Fallen Women, Outlaw Worker?: Making the Identity, Prostitute, in Canadian Criminal Law 6. Mothers, Other Mothers, and Others: The Challenges and Contradictions to Lesbian Parents PART III: CONSTRUCTING THE RACIALIZED OTHER OF LEGAL DISCOURSE 7. Theory and Practice: Clinical Law and Aboriginal People 8. On Law and Hegemonic Moments: Looking Beyond the Law Towards Subjectivities of Subaltern Women PART IV: CONSTRUCTING THE PUBLIC/PRIVATE DISTINCTION OF LEGAL DISCOURSE 9. Custody, Access, and Relocation in a Mobile Society: (En)Gendering the Best Interests Principle 10. Limited by Law?: Gender, Corporate Law, and the Family Firm 11. If Choice is the Answer, What is the Question?: Spelunking in Symes v. Canada
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.072 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".