MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Feasibility of the Application of Common Law Double Tier Model in China from the Burden of Proof Perspective

2013· article· en· W1824946498 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
He Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Evidence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurden of proofPerspective (graphical)ConstitutionLawChinaProof of conceptLaw and economicsPolitical scienceSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since just cause and other behaviors that exclude social harmfulness are not included in constitution of a crime, the distribution of burden of proof is not clear. Behaviors that exclude social harmfulness is the content of the defense of just cause in British and American double tier model and the burden of proof is clear. We cannot introduce or borrow the British and American double tier model to clearly exclude the burden of proof of behaviors which have social harmfulness for it could lead to the increase of the accused’s burden of proof and therefore causes inability of proofing, the burden of proof of both the prosecuting and defending parties mixed and conflict, and no way for bearing the burden of proof for the accused.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicCriminal Law and EvidenceFrench-language works237,207