Let’s Pick Up Where We Left off 25 Years Ago to Expand Access to Civil Justice in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2020 World Justice Project (WJP) Rule of Law Index ranks Canada 9th overall out of 128 countries on a composite rule of law index made up of 8 factors. In this latest version of the WJP Rule of Law Index Canada ranks 9th on constraints on government powers, 9th on absence of corruption, 9th on open government, 9th on respect for fundamental rights, 9th on order and security, 11th on regulatory enforcement, 10th on criminal justice and, much lower than the other rule of law indicators, 19th globally on civil justice. Canada’s overall score is 0.81 out of 1.00. Denmark, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Netherlands, rank 1 st to 5th respectively. Germany, New Zealand and Austria, in that order, also rank higher than Canada on the global index. Canada has ranked 9th globally for the past 3 years and the pattern among the components has been the same. In fact, Canada has scored consistently well over the past 10 years compared with other countries on all of the measures but one – access to civil justice. The methodology for the WJP Index is an online survey of 1,000 individuals in Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver plus interviews with 18 justice specialists and other anonymous contributors.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".