Strafrecht und die Herausforderungen des Pluralismus: 10./11. März 2006, Columbia University Law School, New York,
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Am 10. und 11. März 2006 fand an der Columbia University Law School, New York, ein internationaler und interdisziplinärer Workshop zum Thema „Criminal Law and Cultural Diversity“ statt. Der Workshop wurde gemeinsam von der Columbia University Law School und der Queen's University, Kingston (Ontario), veranstaltet. An ihm nahmen Strafrechtler, Rechtsphilosophen und politische Philosophen teil, wofür auch die Organisatoren beispielhaft standen: Dozent Claes Lernestedt (Örebro Universitet), Prof. Jeremy Waldron (Columbia University) und Prof. Will Kymlicka (Queen's University). Die Herausforderungen des Rechts durch den Pluralismus, insbesondere die Herausforderungen, vor denen das Strafrecht steht, wurden in neun Beiträgen beleuchtet, die Anlass für umfassende und teilweise kontroverse Diskussionen boten: Im Folgenden werden die Diskussionen zusammengefasst (II.); dazu ist es jedoch erforderlich, den Ausgangspunkt der US-amerikanischen Diskussion, namentlich die Debatte um cultural defenses, in Erinnerung zu rufen (I.). Abschließend wird versucht, die Bedeutung zu umreißen, welche die Pluralismusdebatte für die deutschsprachige Strafrechtslehre haben könnte (III.).
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
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".