Criminal Responsibility of Children in International Documents and Comparative Study with Iranian Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Criminal growth, reach the age that person has the power of discernment and full recognition of good and evil actions and understand the legal and religious commandments and on the basis of the criminal in front of their criminal acts, will have criminal responsibility. This article is to examine the criminal liability of children with attitudes to Iran and some countries with international rules. United Nations as a global organization, without following any legal system and also due to the diverse needs of member countries, providing solutions in the field of juvenile delinquency in the form of documents that primarily to improve the national law in this area is rich countries that are not and need international assistance. According to the documents of the United Nations, having a special child rights law is that all children and young people who live in this vast universe, must have it and this national legislation in this regard, it can take effective steps for the rights of children, following the international rules in this area. Criminal growth requires criminal responsibility and with recent developments of the Islamic Penal Code, many former legal forms have been overcome and effective steps have been taken in order to keep pace with human rights law, which has long attached great importance to this issue.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".