MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7029276790

The Intellectually Disabled Witness and the Requirement to\nPromise to Tell the Truth

2017· article· en· W7029276790 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) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAlexander von Humboldt Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWitnessInterpretation (philosophy)Supreme courtEconomic JusticePoliticsFace (sociological concept)Obstacle
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mentally disabled victims of sexual crimes may be prevented from acting as witnesses in a criminal trial if their mental capacity is challenged. They face an important obstacle to access justice if the case against their alleged aggressor mostly relies on their testimony In R. v. D.A.I., in 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada revisited the Canada Evidence Act's requirement of promising to tell the truth and lowered the previously ambiguous threshold of cognitive capacities required to satisfy this requirement. The Evidence Act has been amended in 2015 to reflect the Court's decision. While apparently facilitating people with mental disabilities' (PMD) access to justice, I propose that the Court's interpretation of the Evidence Act contains a problematic normalizing outlook on PMD qua legal subjects, leaves some problems untouched, and could potentially deflate the political urgency of addressing them.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.729
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.245 · 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