Reflection on Judicial System’S Corruption and Offering Solutions to Promote Its Safety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Judicial system of a society is responsible for consolidation and durability of its citizen’s mental and physical, personal and social health and judges bear decision making about citizens’ life, the freedom, rights, duties and estates. One of the items contained in United Nations’ charter is creating the conditions which in it, it is provided justice, respect to human’s rights and basic freedoms without any discrimination. With this purpose, countries’ judicial system should have full safety and in order that anti-corruption laws find run opportunity, it is natural that at first judicial system should be safe from corruption.</p>Writers in this study are paid to investigate reasons and fields of judicial’s corruption to achieve available best procedures in countries’ internal courts and judicial system with the aim of offering global standards and it is introduced available tools to qualitative increase of supervision and establishment of judicial’s security. After reviewing available national and international standards, this article is paid to offer solutions in the direction of judicial system safety’s promotion of Islamic Republic of Iran, assuming that the results of such approach will be increasing of public welfare and trust toward Islamic government.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".