Bibliographic record
Abstract
The claim that justice demands judgement and punishment is a bold statement that does not always hold true. However, even when punishment can be defended as a justified moral response to wrongdoing, the unique role of victim-perpetrator that child soldiers occupy challenges the architects of transitional justice initiatives to devise exceptional means of addressing the harm brought about by most of the child soldiers who are causal agents. Faced with possible prosecutions of child soldiers according to means regularly reserved for adult moral agents (such as the many imprisoned children in Rwanda in the aftermath of the genocide or Uganda’s charges of treason against formerly abducted child soldiers1), we need to question the goals of retributive justice, and ask what the objectives really demand of transitional justice. In the same vein, blanket amnesties, of the sort that were until recently offered in Uganda to anyone who ‘renounces and abandons involvement in the war or armed rebellion’ (Amnesty Act 2000: II.4.1(b)),2 and of the sort granted under the non-responsible child policy, produce reservations in the minds of those who regard some form of accountability for wrongs committed as practically important and morally significant.3
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".