MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6982850176

La certezza del diritto in Canada e una questione di interpretazione?

2023· article· en· W6982850176 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCINECA IRIS Institutial Research Information System (University of Genoa) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemostasis and retained surgical items
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegal certaintyCertaintyInterpretation (philosophy)JurisprudencePoint (geometry)Predictability
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The certainty of Law in Canada is a debated topic in the Canadian legal system especially due to its extreme pluralism. The essay shows tools and means aimed at making legal norms clear. From this point of view legal certainty is treated as predictability in the law-making and in the law-applying activities. Concerning this point, a special attention has been devoted to the legal interpretation and the bindingness of precedents.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0240.028
Scholarly communication0.0230.008
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0060.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 venueCINECA IRIS Institutial Research Information System (University of Genoa)Same topicHemostasis and retained surgical itemsFrench-language works237,207