MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097802619

The Parties and the Nature of the Claim

2007· article· en· W7097802619 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal principles and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisdictionCause of actionAction (physics)Supreme courtStatuteEquity (law)DiscretionCompensation (psychology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

h or responsibility for the children. G went to Canada after the separation and W had sole care of the children. W brought an action for compensation in the Equity Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. This is a jurisdiction that has the discretion to fill gaps in the common law and statute by providing remedies that recognise deeds done in good faith, even when there is no formal legal right to be enforced. In this case, W convinced Hodgson J of the necessary elements to a cause of action called `promissory estoppel' -- a promise that G should not be allowed to walk away from. The Judge found the necessary elements of that cause of action were proven: G had promised to accept the role of a parent in a financial way; relying on G's promise, W had decided to have the children; G had known or intended that W would do so on the basis of that promise; W has and will suffer detriment in that she is now faced with the expensive and onerous task of raising the children alone; and G should now

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0140.007
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0300.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.011

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLegal principles and applicationsFrench-language works237,207