MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1576633348

Straight is the Gate: Capital Clemency in the United States from Gregg to Atkins

2003· article· en· W1576633348 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth Rapaport

Bibliographic record

VenueUNM’s Digital Repository (University of New Mexico) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapital punishmentCapital (architecture)Supreme courtPower (physics)PoliticsPolitical scienceLawPunishment (psychology)Quarter (Canadian coin)Gateway (web page)CriminologySociologyPsychologyHistorySocial psychologyAncient history
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This Article will examine executive clemency decisions in capital cases, from 1977, the year of the first execution after the Supreme Court sanctioned the resumption of executions in Gregg v. Georgia, until June of 2002, when Atkins v. Virginia was decided. The power of the executive to grant clemency to a capital defendant can be viewed as a gateway -- one last chance to be spared capital punishment. The gateway to clemency has been exceedingly narrow in this quarter century era of capital punishment. Perhaps surprisingly, it has been very narrow indeed for the three classes of capital prisoners who are the focus of this Beyond Atkins Symposium, and who might be expected to be particularly suitable candidates for clemency, i.e., juveniles, the mentally retarded, and the mentally ill. Clemency decisions are of course fraught for those at the threshold of execution, but they are also fraught for governors and Presidents charged with deciding clemency. This Article will also explore the narrow path the decision makers walk as they confront the moral and political risks the clemency power entails.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUNM’s Digital Repository (University of New Mexico)Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207