MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081005393 · doi:10.4000/ahrf.617

La place de la partie lésée dans le procès pénal révolutionnaire

2002· article· fr· W2081005393 on OpenAlexaff
Jacques Leroy

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales historiques de la Révolution française · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedieval and Early Modern Justice
Canadian institutionsInstitut d'Histoire de l'Amérique Française
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quelles ont été, durant la Révolution, les prérogatives des victimes d’infractions dans le procès pénal? L’analyse de la législation alors applicable permet deux observations: d’abord, dès la Constituante, la victime peut devenir un accusateur. Les révolutionnaires redécouvrent les vertus de l’accusation privée qu’ils mettront dix ans à éliminer au profit de l’accusation publique. On peut remarquer que l’Ancien Régime était déjà parvenu au même résultat dans l’Ordonnance criminelle de 1670. Ensuite, la Convention inscrit clairement, et pour la première fois, en 1795 dans le Code des délits et des peines les définitions des actions publique et civile, ce qui fixe définitivement l’objet de la demande des parties lésées dans le procès répressif. Quelles que soient les prérogatives procédurales dont elle dispose, la victime ne doit les utiliser qu’à fins réparatrices. À cet égard, l’Ordonnance de 1670 avait déjà fait le premier pas. L’œuvre législative postérieure à la Révolution confirmera la séparation des fonctions de poursuite et de réparation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.011
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales historiques de la Révolution françaiseSame topicMedieval and Early Modern JusticeFrench-language works237,207