Les progrès et leurs effets pervers dans l’application de la justice des mineurs : une perspective comparative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the most important developments in juvenile justice systems in the western countries over this century has been the 1970s crisis of the well established welfare model, a crisis based on the lack of rights in juvenile procedures, the ineffectiveness of treatment interventions and the failure to decrease delinquency in society. The reaction to this situation assumed different forms in different contexts, and showed numerous contradictions. In some countries the justice model, an adultisation of juvenile justice, became dominant; in other countries the «back to justice » movement was not accepted, and other models developed. In the actual organisation of juvenile justice some trends emerged : deinstitutionalisation, diversion and community alternatives to custody, the utilisation of private resources and volunteers inside a public network and bifurcation between serious and normal offenders. The crisis of the welfare model and critical aspects of the justice model for juveniles has stimulated experts and policy makers to search for new paradigms, such as, for exemple, delinquency management, reparation and mediation, which probably represent important elements of the future of juvenile justice systems.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".