Le principe de normativité criminelle, reconfiguration du principe de légalité criminelle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The consensus today is unanimous. The principle of criminal legality has been weakened by developments in law. Statute law is no longer the sole source of criminal law ; its influence is declining and judges will play an indisputable role in criminal law. These developments are rooted in criminal law, of which they are parameters. It is impossible to find a criminal law in history that conforms to the principle of criminal legality such as that proclaimed by the revolutionaries of 1789. It is therefore appropriate that it should evolve. Therefore, these parameters are together the origin of the criminal standard. Contrary to statute law, this standard integrates all developments in common law. This standard is at the core of the common law for which it is the source. The principle of criminal legality is therefore no longer configured with reference to statute law but the criminal standard. As a consequence, we should speak of the principle of the standardisation of criminal law. This reconfiguration is therefore the solution to a principle of criminal legality and a statute law in decline. It allows for the guaranteed protection of individual rights and liberties taking into account developments of law. From now on, it shoudl be affirmed « that there is no crime without the criminal standard ».
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".