MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2228616027

Cooperación y Asistencia Judicial con la Corte Penal Internacional: el Caso de Ecuador (Cooperation and Judicial Assistance with the International Criminal Court: A Case-Study of Ecuador)

2007· article· es· W2228616027 on OpenAlex
Salvador Herencia Carrasco

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal processes and jurisprudence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminal courtStatutePolitical scienceHumanitiesPenal codeLatin AmericansLawRome Statute of the International Criminal CourtDerechoStatute of limitationsInternational lawArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spanish Abstract: Este ensayo es parte de una publicacion conjunta que analiza los desafios en America Latina, Espana, Alemania e Italia para implementar mecanismos de cooperacion y asistencia a la Corte Penal Internacional. El ensayo se centra en las reformas que se deben contemplar en el Codigo de Procedimiento Penal de Ecuador, con el fin de poder cumplir con las disposiciones establecidas en el Parte IX del Estatuto de Roma. English Abstract: This essay is part of a publication that analyzes the challenges to implement internal mechanisms to cooperate and assist the International Criminal Court in Latin America, Spain, Germany and Italy. The essay focuses on the reforms needed in the Criminal Procedural Code of Ecuador in order to fully implement cooperation dispositions in Part IX of the Rome Statute.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.604
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.298 · 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