MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7071475799

A Suitable Population: British Columbia's Japanese Treaty Act Litigation, 1920-1923

2017· article· en· W7071475799 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Government
KeywordsTreatyGovernment (linguistics)Supreme courtPower (physics)KingdomInternational law
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the early 1920s, the courts of British Columbia, the Supreme Court of Canada and the\nJudicial Committee of the Privy Council considered a series of constitutional challenges\nto a British Columbia law requiring the provincial government to discriminate against\nJapanese and Chinese persons in the making of government contracts. The attack on\nthis racially-motivated law was founded on the 1911 Treaty of Commerce and\nNavigation between the United Kingdom and Japan, under which Canada was bound\nto respect the right of the Japanese Empire’s subjects “equally with native [British]\nsubjects, to carry on their commerce and manufacture, and to trade in all kinds of\nmerchandise of lawful commerce”. Some of British Columbia and Canada’s best-known\nadvocates argued these cases. The decisions they produced addressed important and still\nrelevant questions about the relationship between international and domestic law,\nthe Crown’s treaty power and Canadian federalism. These cases are remarkable early\ninstances of Canada’s international obligations being invoked by litigants to challenge\ndomestic law.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0310.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network)Same topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207