MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2254199577

Toward a Constitutional Law of Crime and Punishment

2004· article· en· W2254199577 on OpenAlex

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

VenueHastings law journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminal lawLawProscriptionPunishment (psychology)Political scienceConstitutional lawScrutinyProportionality (law)Public lawDignityAutonomyCriminal procedureLaw and economicsSociologyPoliticsPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Procedural criminal law is heavily constitutionalized, whereas substantive criminal law has largely escaped constitutional scrutiny. In this Article, Professor Dubber lays out a framework for the development of a general constitutional law of crime and punishment, with a particular emphasis on the general and special part of substantive criminal law. Constitutional criminal law, Dubber argues, rests on the concept of respect for the autonomy and dignity of persons that is reflected in such constitutional guarantees as the right to due process and the proscription against cruel and unusual punishments.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.274 · 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