A Quarter of a Century of Rulemaking with Particular Attention to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is a happy coincidence that Edward Thaxter Gignoux completes twenty-five years on the bench at about the same time that the present rulemaking procedures in the federal system reach their twenty-fifth anniversary. In the quarter of a century of the present system for rulemaking there have been three distinguished chairmen of the Standing Committee—the committee to which there is delegated overall responsibility for rulemaking by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The three chairmen are Senior Circuit Judge Albert Maris, generally thought of as the modern "Father" of federal rulemaking, Senior District Judge Rozell Thomson and the present Chairman who has very recently taken senior status, Ed Gignoux. I have had the pleasure of serving under all three. The chairmen of the Standing Committee are deserving of much of the credit for the fact that the Federal Rules of Procedure have served as a model for the rest of the country over the period of this last quarter century. The task for Chairman Gignoux is to continue the high quality of the federal rules at a time when there is greater interest than ever in the rulemaking process and increasing pressure to change the procedures which have worked so well in the past.
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 | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".