Reconsecrating the Temple of Justice: Invocations of Civilization and Humanity in the Nuremberg Justice Case
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Les procès de Nuremberg constituent le fondement du droit criminel international contemporain. Néanmoins, ces procès sont rarement étudiés dans un contexte social et conceptuel plus large. Cet article examine le contexte ainsi que le rôle du concept de «civilisation» tel qu'utilisé dans le cas deU.S. v. Altstoetter, c'est-à-dire le procès de 1947 des juges et administrateurs judiciaires nazis à Nuremberg. L'auteure place la référence au concept de «civilisation» telle qu'évoqué parAltstoetterau sein d'une tradition du droit international qui définit la loi et la civilisation comme étant «co-constitutives». La courAltstoetterconceptualisait l'Allemagne comme un pays essentiellenient civilisé tombant dans une violence barbare et anarchique. Cette représentation aide la cour à établir la culpabilité des accusés, à blâmer la violence nazie sur l'absence de loi ainsi qu'à établir sa propre autorité.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.075 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".