MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2567143047

Lygtinio paleidimo paskirtis baudžiamojoje teisėje

2003· article· lt· W2567143047 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ramūnas Liutikas

Bibliographic record

VenueJurisprudencija · 2003
Typearticle
Languagelt
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Evidence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPunishment (psychology)PrisonLaw and economicsGeneralizationOrder (exchange)Political scienceEconomicsLawPsychologySocial psychologyMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the last couple of decades penalties alternative to the prison terms have become more and more popular all over the world. is undergoing the process of international and regional integration now. It caused changes in the Lithuania's penal system, which is being reformed in order to conform to international standards. Article Conditional Release in the Law System of Lithuania analyses the conditional release, a type of penalties alternative to the prison terms and its place in law system of Lithuania. Author of this article discussed factors, which had allowed bearing the idea of the conditional release, development and place of this institute in today's law system. Consideration of arguments is concentrated on trying to show that conditional release is not only a release from punishment but it also deals with the contents of punishment and is an extension of it. There are some economic factors given about advantages of conditional release. This research work also analyses how conditional release influences the criminality and how it impacts the re-integration of convicts. Article shows imperfection of some aspects of conditional release and the possible ways to improve the situation. Within the content of article the experience of Canada and Sweden is described in the field of conditional release. Generalization of research on probation offices, which was carried out by the author of this article is included. 52 Probation officers took part in the research. Insufficient and ineffective regulation of conditional release, lack of financial support for probation offices and imperfect mechanism of conditional release in were specified as the main problems. Taking into account the results of this research, the author presents some proposals, which may allow making the system of conditional release more effective. For example, decision on whether or not to grant conditional release should be taken by special independent non-judicial institution, not courts. The theme of the article is interesting and is not completely researched yet.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.016

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurisprudencijaSame topicCriminal Law and EvidenceFrench-language works237,207