Constitutional Battles between Parliament and the Executive : the Canadian Prorogation Crisis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionIt is widely agreed that Canadian constitutional law was profoundly transformed by the adoption of the Constitution Act, 1982 and with it, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. 1 As the Supreme Court of Canada has explained: "When the Charter was introduced, Canada went....from a system of Parliamentary supremacy to constitutional supremacy....Simply put, each Canadian was given individual rights and freedoms which no government or legislature could take away." 2 Over the last three decades, the Charter and its entrenched list of rights and freedoms has come to dominate Canadian constitutional politics, scholarship, and law.Debate continues in academic circles, 3 among political parties, 4 and occasionally in judicial decisions themselves 5
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 | 0.013 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.060 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.001 |
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.
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".