MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6990944057

Evidence: A Canadian Casebook, 3rd Edition

2011· article· en· W6990944057 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJury Decision Making Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasebookSupreme courtCredibilityReinterpretationCivil procedureSection (typography)Common lawStatute
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Designed to meet the needs of second-year and third-year courses in evidence, the third edition of Evidence: A Canadian Casebook investigates the rules and principles that govern how facts are established in legal proceedings. The author team, consisting of well-respected scholars from a number of Canadian law schools, has developed a casebook that sets itself apart from other resources by weaving a single case study — inspired by an actual murder prosecution — throughout the entire text. At the end of each chapter, the authors introduce new developments in the case study, and students are asked to apply what they have just learned to solve problems that emerge in the course of that case. As students work through this unique text, they will become familiar with the case study and invested in solving the evidence problems it poses. Additionally, the third edition of Evidence: A Canadian Casebook will help instructors bridge the gap between evidence law in theory and in practice, giving students a deeper sense of the methodology that informs all evidence analysis.\nThe third edition reflects new developments in evidence law in Canada, including the Supreme Court of Canada’s latest decision on the principled approach to hearsay, the streamlining of the treatment of confessions and improperly obtained evidence, and the Supreme Court of Canada’s reinterpretation of section 24(2) of the Charter. Other cases added are F.H. v. McDougall, (2008), in which the Supreme Court addresses credibility and the civil standard of proof; and R. v. J.H.S., (2008), in which the Supreme Court revisits credibility in criminal cases where an accused testifies. These cases are presented with insightful commentary by the authors, offering students a compelling introduction to the subject of evidence.

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.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.236 · 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