Re-Examination of Rape and Its Growing Jurisprudence under International Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The trend of recurrence rape in our society today constitutes a serious phenomenal threat to the human existence and dignity. This paper examined the offence of rape holistically from definitional perspective with reference to related concepts such as sexual violence, and marital /spousal rape. This paper also examined selected statutes which prohibit rape. It further examined rape in the context of genocide, crime against humanity, torture, and war crimes. Also, some selected statistics of rape were examined. Also, examined are effects and aftermaths of rape. The aim of this paper is to show that rape is a monstrously dangerous to humanity and should not be underrated. This is a desk-based research which relies on both primary and secondary resources of data which have been subjected to contentual and contextual analysis. It is the findings of this author among others that issue of rape must be frontally attacked but also that the problem of rape cannot be solved by measures taken within the criminal justice sector alone.
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 | 0.009 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".