MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W588353516

A simple common lawyer : essays in honour of Michael Taggert

2009· book· en· W588353516 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Dyzenhaus, Murray Hunt, Grant Huscroft

Bibliographic record

VenueHart eBooks · 2009
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisprudenceHonourLawEconomic JusticeState (computer science)HistorySociologyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. Introduction Grant Huscroft, David Dyzenhaus and Murray Hunt 2. Process, Quality and Variable Standards: Responding to an Agent Provocateur Mark Aronson 3. The Legitimacy of the Rule of Law David Dyzenhaus 4. Righting Administrative Law Sian Elias 5. The 'Hidden Paw' of the State and the Publicisation of Private Law Carol Harlow 6. Against Bifurcation Murray Hunt 7. 'You Say You Want a Revolution': Bills of Rights in the Age of Human Rights Grant Huscroft and Paul Rishworth 8. Why the History of English Administrative Law is not Written Martin Loughlin 9. Mike Taggart and Australian Exceptionalism Sir Anthony Mason 10. Public Function Tests: Bringing Back the State? Janet McLean 11. A History of the Modern Jurisprudence of Aboriginal Rights - Some Observations on the Journey So Far P G McHugh 12. 'Because I Said So!' Is That Ever Good Enough?-Findings and Reasons in Canadian Administrative Law David Mullan 13. To Be or Not to Be: The Constitutional Relationship Between New Zealand and Australia Cheryl Saunders 14. Early Days Sir Stephen Sedley 15. The Killing of the Prisoners at Agincourt and a Movement from Contract to Status A W B Simpson The Writings of Michael Taggart David Dyzenhaus Murray Hunt Grant Huscroft Cheryl Saunders Mark Aronson David Mullan Paul Rishworth Paul McHugh Janet McLean Brian Simpson Carol Harlow Martin Loughlin Justice Stephen Sedley Chief Justice Sian Elias Chief Justice Anthony Maso

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.846

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHart eBooksSame topicLegal Education and Practice InnovationsFrench-language works237,207