MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6983001368

The Law of Restitution

2020· article· en· W6983001368 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal principles and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRestitutionUnjust enrichmentTortWrongdoingUnconscionabilityMistakeEquity (law)Constructive trustDutySubrogation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Part one. Introduction. Historical background -- A Canadian law of restitution -- General principles -- Part two. Remedies. Common law remedies -- Equitable remedies -- Tracing at law -- Tracing in equity -- Subrogation -- Contribution and indemnity -- Part three. The right to restitution. Topic I. Mistake. Money paid under a mistake of fact -- Money paid under a mistake of law -- Other benefits conferred by mistake -- Topic II. Ineffective transactions. Informality -- Incapacity -- Illegality -- Want of authority -- Mistake, misunderstanding and uncertainty -- Frustration -- Discharge for breach -- Misrepresentation -- Contracts and gifts which do not materialize -- Topic III. Public authorities. Restitution from public authorities -- Topic IV. Profit from wrongdoing. Criminal and quasi-criminal acts -- Waiver of tort -- Breach of contract -- Compulsion -- Breach of fiduciary duty -- Breach of confidence -- Unconscionable transactions -- Other equitable wrongdoing -- Topic V. Officiousness. Necessitous intervention : the altruistic intermeddler -- Compulsory discharge of another's liability -- The self-serving intermeddler -- Topic VI. Pettkus v. Becker and its progeny. Property disputes between cohabitants -- Topic VII. Benefits acquired from third parties. Restitution of benefits conferred upon the defendant by a third party -- Benefits wrongly acquired by a third party before transfer to the defendant.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.019
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.005

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)→Same topicLegal principles and applications→French-language works237,207→