MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1885468094 · doi:10.4000/cultura.1653

Derecho de gentes y política religiosa

2012· article· es· W1885468094 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCultura · 2012
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Studies and Legal History
Canadian institutionsCongress of Aboriginal Peoples
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanitiesPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Relativamente ao ius gentium deparamo-nos com três questões relacionadas: existe na antiga Roma um Direito internacional? Pode dizer-se que sim em dois aspectos: ao estabelecer-se o direito das embaixadas e da guerra e ao regular os pactos internacionais. Internamente, contudo, existirá um directo étnico, um reconhecimento e um respeito pelas diferenças culturais que se verificavam entre as diversas nações e cidades do Orbe? E, mais concretamente, até que ponto é que Roma era tolerante com as diversas religiões das distintas culturas ou, então, proselitista? O ius gentium aplica-se a cada um destes níveis. Estudamos o caso da relação Roma-Gades e os dados com que contribui para a resolução destas questões.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.227 · 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