MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097204252

A Review of Jurisprudence Regarding Event Data Recorders:

2005· article· en· W7097204252 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransport Systems and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisprudenceCharterSophisticationEvent (particle physics)Data Protection Act 1998Economic Justice
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This project report begins by reviewing the evolution of event data recorders (EDR's) in roadway vehicles, concentrating on the increasing incidence and sophistication of these recorders in lightduty vehicles. The present and future benefits are outlined with attention to accuracy and reliability of the data generated. This review of EDR development highlights the present limitations and future potential of EDR's as they become integrated with other electronic recording systems. Jurisprudence is evolving in response to these described developments: Rule making by appropriate agencies is progressing in Canada, USA and other jurisdictions. The central consideration at present is the tension between the many public benefits of EDR technology and the need to adequately address an appropriate protection of personal privacy. This study explores the nature of "Rights " as they are expressed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the US Constitution. A Review of Jurisprudence Regarding Event Data Recorders 1 The highest courts of justice in both countries have recognized a right to privacy of the person,

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0150.016
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTransport Systems and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207