MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964125214 · doi:10.33426/rcg/2019/106/1390

Una nueva etapa para las Comisiones Parlamentarias de Investigación: los límites que imponen a su actividad la dimensión extra procesal de la presunción de inocencia y el derecho al honor

2019· article· es· W2964125214 on OpenAlexaff
Pedro José Peña Jiménez

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de las Cortes Generales · 2019
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal processes and jurisprudence
Canadian institutionsOptech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La sentencia limita el marco de actuación de las comisiones parlamentarias de investigación y, en consecuencia, de las Cámaras, al afirmar que las conclusiones que puedan alcanzar deben de estar exentas de cualquier apreciación o imputación individualizada de conductas o acciones ilícitas a los investigados. La sentencia concluye que las Cortes Valencianas no han respetado el derecho del recurrente a no ser considerado autor o participante en un hecho ilícito y, por tanto, han vulnerado su derecho al honor.

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)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.095
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.095
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.062
Scholarly communication0.0300.019
Open science0.0030.012
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de las Cortes GeneralesSame topicLegal processes and jurisprudenceFrench-language works237,207