MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7048171159

Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility [2nd Edition]

2006· article· en· W7048171159 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSuperconducting and THz Device Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional responsibilityLegal ethicsLegal professionProfessional ethicsProfessional conductSubject (documents)Practice of lawEthical code
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of ethical behaviour and professional responsibility has long been something lawyers have insisted is a hallmark of their chosen profession. However, many lawyers would argue that a discussion of these matters is necessary only when considering isolated and occasional cases of aberrant behaviour. In Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility, Allan Hutchinson makes a convincing case that this view no longer serves the profession well. He argues that the profound changes in the way in which law is practised, and the demographic shifts among those who practise it, demand a new and systematic approach to the subject — one that stresses personal responsibility over professional regulation. Professor Hutchinson’s book is both an accessible introduction to legal ethics and professional responsibility for students of law and a provocative call to arms for the profession as a whole. The second edition of the book contains significant discussion and analysis of the Canadian Bar Association’s new Code of Professional Conduct, which was adopted in 2006.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.013

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicSuperconducting and THz Device TechnologyFrench-language works237,207