Corporal Punishment of Children in Iranian Law and International Instruments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Corporal punishment of children in their education are important issues that historically have been accepted and Yankvhsh Unfortunately in today's society has neglected the rights of children and adults of these rights by violated. Islamic jurisprudence is recommended to right what ways? As well as laws have been codified in law what is? In the verses of Quran and Hadith from the infallible Imams come from (PBUH) emphasizes the reverence, love, forgiveness, compassion and Rfq and productive than children. On Islamic law, as is early in the punishment of child esteem and under certain conditions as a measure to maintain the system for training and behavior modification, family and children, voided, and to protect the interests, sanctions such as liability and responsibility, provided is. In this regard, in particular understanding of Islam and Shiite jurisprudence that laws in our country is the source and the directive could be an important step for appropriate legislation B for children. The law tries years of punishment and corporal punishment of children to prevent and eliminate this phenomenon in human society and in recent years a comprehensive international instrument to assert the rights of children and the prohibition of corporal punishment for exercising their raised have. Thus, at the outset, and seemingly contradictory approaches is formed. Therefore, in this study, explain and evaluate the real subject of two approaches have been tried according to the interests, rights, education, interests and protect the interests of children, the ways to close the two approaches together will be offered.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".