MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995795405 · doi:10.7202/004719ar

Le crime pardonné

2002· article· fr· W1995795405 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marie‐Sylvie Dupont‐Bouchat

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminologie · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedieval and Early Modern Justice
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesEconomic JusticeEthnologyPhilosophyPolitical scienceSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deux modèles de justice criminelle coexistent tout au long des XVI e , XVII e et XVIII e siècles : celui de la justice royale fondé sur la condamnation et la punition, et celui, plus caché, de la justice réparatrice, fondé sur la négociation et l'accommodement, hérité du Moyen Âge. Mais à partir du XVI e siècle, le souverain qui a monopolisé l'exercice de la justice, le droit de punir, s'est aussi réservé le droit de pardonner. Punir et pardonner constituent ainsi les deux volets complémentaires d'une double stratégie de maintien de l'ordre, fondée à la fois sur l'éclat des supplices et la générosité du pardon. Pour être pardonné, l'accusé doit reconnaître son crime, en demander pardon au souverain. Celui-ci lui accorde sa rémission, moyennant la réparation des dommages causés à la victime, ou à sa famille, et le paiement d'une amende au profit du souverain. La justice réparatrice s'inscrit désormais dans un modèle de « justice imposée » où la négociation est reléguée dans l'accord conclu avec la partie offensée.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.004

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 head0.565
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminologieSame topicMedieval and Early Modern JusticeFrench-language works237,207