MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970661682 · doi:10.3917/cdlj.1901.0099

La retransmission en direct des procès

2019· article· fr· W2970661682 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-Paul Jean

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de la Justice · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJury Decision Making Processes
Canadian institutionsInstitut d'Histoire de l'Amérique Française
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé L'image du suspect présentée à l'opinion publique dans l'enquête policière, ou de la personne accusée lorsqu'elle comparaît en justice, illustre et conditionne la vision que les médias veulent donner d'une affaire, confortant le plus souvent la thèse de la culpabilité. Le principe de la présomption d'innocence, en limitant le droit à la diffusion des images, veut préserver l'impartialité de la perception des juges et du jury lors de l'audience. Mais le principe de la liberté d'expression et les facilités actuelles d'enregistrement et de diffusion des audiences par le recours aux nouvelles technologies numériques ont beaucoup fait évoluer ce débat, notamment au sein des juridictions pénales internationales et de juridictions étrangères.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0130.010
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0970.034

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.306 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de la JusticeSame topicJury Decision Making ProcessesFrench-language works237,207