MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620634240 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v10n3p98

Criminal Responsibility of Children in International Documents and Comparative Study with Iranian Law

2017· article· en· W2620634240 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Iraj Lotfi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Socioeconomic and Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawDiscernmentPolitical scienceCriminal lawInternational lawLegislationHuman rightsCriminal procedurePaceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicGlobal Socioeconomic and Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207