MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081701307 · doi:10.7202/042909ar

The Substance of the Offence : Included Crimes and the Philosophy of Substance

2005· article· fr· W2081701307 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Christopher B. Gray

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFree Will and Agency
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesJurisprudencePhilosophyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette note a pour objet l'institution juridique de ce qu'on appelle en droit criminel les infractions incluses. La jurisprudence nous enseigne que la « substance de l'infraction », au sens du par. 510(1) du Code criminel, dépend de l'acteur. Mais les concepts juridiques ne nous disent pas clairement quel est la nature de ce lien entre l'acteur et la substance des infractions. Et ce principe, par ailleurs n'est pas absolu. En revanche, le fait qu'existe une ou des infractions incluses est d'une importance énorme pour l'acteur. Comme ces différentes données semblent avoir été perdues de vue, il devient impérieux que la jurisprudence en tienne compte.

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)0.003
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.057
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicFree Will and AgencyFrench-language works237,207