Bibliographic record
Abstract
La presomption de la favor iuris du mariage est un element fondamental et indispensable pour comprendre le proces de nullite de mariage. Cet article examine une dimension specifique de la discussion: l'importance de considerer la structure logique generale de l'argumentation dans les cas de nullite de mariage pour en arriver a une comprehension exacte du c. 1060. En premier lieu, l'article explore la justification pastorale et canonique de la presomption de validite du mariage. Deuxiemement, il presente une justification pour cette presomption en s'appuyant sur les principes de logique elementaire. Troisiemement, certaines presuppositions philosophiques derriere des defis contemporains a la presomption de validite du mariage sont examinees, specialement a la lumiere d'allocutions papales recentes a la Rote romaine. L'article termine en concluant qu'un renversement de la presomption de validite du mariage est indefendable a la lumiere de la logique d'argumentation.
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 | 0.011 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".