Henri D. Bosly et Damien Vandermeersch, Génocide, crimes contre l’humanité, crimes de guerre face à la justice: Les juridictions internationales et les tribunaux nationaux, 2e éd, Bruxelles, Bruylant, 2012
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au courant des dernieres decennies, nous avons pu voir le droit penal international se developper promptement. C’est principalement a la suite de la Deuxieme Guerre mondiale que son portrait commence a etre brosse plus serieusement. La multitude des conflits armes survenus au cours du XXe siecle ont contribue aux developpements du droit international penal. Nous n'avons qu'a penser au massacre des Armeniens ou, plus recemment, aux crimes commis lors des guerres en ex-Yougoslavie. La creation de juridictions ad hoc et d'une cour permanente pouvant juger les auteurs de violations du droit international a rencontre plusieurs embuches politiques et procedurales. Ecrit par Henri D. Bosly, professeur emerite de l'Universite de Louvain (UCL) et par Damien Vandermeersch, avocat general a la Cour de cassation en Belgique et professeur a l'Universite de Louvain (UCL) et aux facultes universitaires Saint-Louis en Belgique, l'ouvrage Genocide, crimes contre l'humanite et crimes de guerre face a la justice: Les juridictions internationales et les tribunaux nationaux propose une analyse du droit penal international et, plus precisement, de la complementarite entre les juridictions internationales et les juridictions nationales dans le contexte des crimes internationaux tels que le genocide, les crimes de guerre, les crimes contre l'humanite et le terrorisme.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.003 |
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".