MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1554896968 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v8n6p111

Investigation of Trafficking: Establishing the Circumstances Subject to a Proof

2015· article· en· W1554896968 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Djorobekova Arzigul Mamajunusovna, Pen Sergey Gennadjevich

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpartialityBurden of proofSubject (documents)LegislationLaw enforcementCriminologyPolitical scienceCriminal lawLawThe RepublicCompleteness (order theory)Criminal procedureEnforcementPsychologyComputer scienceMathematicsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this work is to investigate the circumstances subject to a proof in criminal cases on human trafficking, in order to ensure the effective investigation of criminal cases in this category. The authors propose to classify the circumstances subject to a proof, depending on the elements of offense, based on the analysis of criminal and criminal procedural legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Kyrgyz Republic, as well as investigation practice of the criminal cases on trafficking in persons. The use of the classification of the circumstances, subject to a proof, submitted by the authors, in the investigation of trafficking in human beings, by the law-enforcement authorities, allows ensuring the comprehensiveness, completeness and impartiality of the investigation and improves the quality of the investigation of such crimes.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207