Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".