Civil Justice System and the Public: Learning from Experiences to find Practices that Work
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the Civil Justice System & the Public research project (the “CJSP”) undertaken by the Canadian Forum on Civil Justice and several research partners from 2001 to 2006. The CJSP was an ambitious and complex project, spanning several years and involving a multi-tracked, multi-party evaluation of communication practices in the already complex arena of Canada’s civil justice system. Designed as collaborative action research, this was not a static project: over the course of five years, the project objectives and research processes continuously evolved as the research produced new and better information about various aspects of communication in the civil justice system. Getting the word out about the project, what is often termed “dissemination activity,” began with the project inception, has continued throughout the research process and is ongoing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.029 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.055 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.025 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.024 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".