MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6961405839 · doi:10.14288/1.0438031

Tort Law : Cases and Commentaries

2023· article· en· W6961405839 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasebookTortCompensation (psychology)DelictCommon lawCivil law (Civil law)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This casebook provides an introduction to tort law: the law that recognises and responds to civil wrongdoing. The material is arranged in two parts. Part I comprises 1-11 and addresses intentional and dignitary torts and the overarching theories and goals of tort law. Part II comprises 12-25 and addresses no-fault compensation schemes, negligence, nuisance, strict liability, and tort law’s place within our broader legal systems. This casebook is designed to complement the 1L curriculum in common law Canadian law schools. It does not try to present an exhaustive overview of all of Canadian tort law. Instead, it focusses on the central doctrines and topics that are most commonly taught in torts courses. [An updated edition of this casebook was uploaded on 2024-06-07.] [OER Description: This tort law text was developed to support graduate students in Canadian law schools. Each chapter of this open educational resource is largely self-contained to support instructors assigning sections to suit their syllabi. The text includes cases, summaries, and links to formative assessment quizzes based on the casebook content, providing immediate feedback to students. The most recent version of this OER can be found in CANLII.]

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0880.024

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicGenetic diversity and population structure→French-language works237,207→