Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada is one of the few jurisdictions in the world where cannabis for personal and recreational purposes is legal. Prior to October 17th 2018, the possession of any quantity of cannabis was a criminal offence, making individuals vulnerable to onerous criminal sanctions. The legislative act that resulted in the decriminalization and regulation of cannabis was framed as a means of advancing public health goals and reducing inequalities. Those once engaged in low level cannabis activities were no longer subject to criminal sanctions within Canada. However, the criminal status and practices upholding the prohibition of cannabis continues at Canada’s borders and international ports of entry. Individuals are still subject to criminal sanctions if caught entering Canada with cannabis. This thesis explores the enduring prohibition of cannabis at Canada’s international ports of entry from the perspective of its theoretical oppressive elements. I will examine the theoretical risk of state-propelled discrimination resulting from the continued prohibition of cannabis at the Canadian border by referencing sources of knowledge and applying that against the conditions surrounding law enforcement at Canada’s international ports of entry. Conclusions drawn about the possibility of discriminatory practices at the border will depend on existing knowledge. Generalizations regarding the theoretical risk of racist practices surrounding the continued prohibition of cannabis on the Canadian side of the Canada-U.S. divide will be made by referencing issues afflicting racialized populations in Canada.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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".