MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7008466828

The Canadian Forum on Civil Justice: Project Evaluation: Final Report

2002· article· en· W7008466828 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic JusticeValue (mathematics)Civil serviceWork (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Department of Justice has funded the Canadian Forum on Civil Justice (CFCJ, or the Forum) in its start-up phase, from 1998/99 to 2000/01. The Forum is now seeking funding for its on-going operations. As part of its decision-making process, the Department determined that an evaluation of the Forum’s activities to-date would be desirable. This evaluation was therefore undertaken to determine whether the Forum has added value to the Canadian civil justice community. This report describes the Forum and its activities, and presents answers to the evaluation questions addressed.

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)0.191
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.140
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1910.140
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0110.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.284 · 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.

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)→Same topicLegal Education and Practice Innovations→French-language works237,207→