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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.010
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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