MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739323641 · doi:10.15642/ad.2014.4.01.71-91

Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Materiil menurut Hakim Pengadilan Negeri Kepanjen

2014· article· en· W2739323641 on OpenAlexaff
Fakhruddin Arrozi

Bibliographic record

Venueal-Daulah Jurnal Hukum dan Perundangan Islam · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Studies and Policies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisprudenceLawTortVerdictPolitical scienceConstitutional courtSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This paper describes the material tort against the decision of Pengadilan Negeri (PN) of Kepanjen No. 91/Pid.B/2008 / PN.KPJ on a post-verdict corruption of Constitutional Court of RI. No.003/PUU-IV/2006 and then analyzes from the standpoint of positive law and criminal (jinayah) Jurisprudence. The study concludes that although a tort is legally no longer valid in law of Indonesia after the Constitutional Court’s decision but in the case of corruption, Pengadilan Negeri of Kepanjen still applies the rule of the material tort. The existence of obscurity formula of tort is caused by the interpretation of the law and jurisprudence on tort material conducted by PN Kepanjen. The action of Pengadilan Negeri of Kepanjen in performing legal discovery and referring to jurisprudence, according to the criminal jurisprudence perspective, is true because Islam encourages its followers to do ijtihad when the rules are silent on the case submitted to the judge. If the judge cannot do ijtihad, he should refer to the previous jurisprudence.Keywords: Law, material, corruption, jurisprudence

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueal-Daulah Jurnal Hukum dan Perundangan IslamSame topicLegal Studies and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207