Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'experience actuelle de plaidoyer canonique pour le clerge accuse d'inconduite sexuelle a certes occupe l'attention des canonistes. L'A. fournit un traitement historique de plaidoyer canonique avec la vie et l'oeuvre de Richard Burtsell, un pretre de l'Archidiocese de New York et avocat des pretres. L'A. illustre le contexte du catholicisme en Amerique au XIX e siecle, qui a donne lieu a une variete de tensions entre les eveques et leurs pretres. Une attention speciale est portee a trois cas qui ont fait epoque et dans lesquels Burtsell a agi comme avocat: ceux des pretres Edward McGlynn, Louis Lambert et Burtsell lui-meme. En guise de conclusion, differents themes canoniques sont soulignes dans le livre de Burtsell, The Canonical Status of Priests in the United States (1887), qui ont contribue au developpement de protocoles canoniques concernant le recours administratif legitime, l'appel et le droit de defense et de consultation.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.004 |
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".