A Proposed Transjudicial Approach to s. 15(2)\nCharter Adjudication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada and India are both pluralistic democracies with diverse populations. Both countries have drafted constitutional provisions which enshrine equality rights and permit affirmative action. In India, various disadvantaged groups receive special protection from the Constitution of India, such as the Other Backward Classes (OBC). The Supreme Court of India has held that States and the Central government must identify the "creamy layer" within the OBC category so that reservations target members who are most in need. Otherwise, the OBC category is overinclusive. The creamy layer includes those who are socially and economically advanced and who no longer require the benefits of the reservation system. Race-based affirmative action may be overinclusive in Canada. For this reason, the author argues that the Supreme Court of Canada should explore the concept of creamy layer in any of its future decisions on s. 15(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
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 | 0.031 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| 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".