MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982874451 · doi:10.14195/0870-4147_50_2

Woman and Liberal Revolution

2019· article· en· W2982874451 on OpenAlexaff
Pilar Calvo Caballero

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Portuguesa de História · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Penology
Canadian institutionsOptech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHonorWifeHonestyPortugueseLawSociologyOrder (exchange)Political sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study of the first liberal Penal Codes (Spanish from 1822/1848/1850 and Portuguese from 1852) shows that the Spanish and the Portuguese woman share the same legal frame, but for a few differences. This frame preserves the feminine pattern of behaviour established by the Old Regime Courts, subject to man’s authority and to marriage as a guarantee of social and family order, but with a change: man’s honor resting upon the woman is honesty, not any longer privileged (married and honest) but imposed (home angel) and punished (dishonest woman). Between applying mercy or an exemplary treatment to a woman, liberal law chooses the last. Woman is not the plural category of the Old Regime any more, but the dual category angel/dishonest, which brings about her fragilitas. This leads to equality among women and approach to men in most offenses, but for the glaring inequality with regard to honor. An exception: the Portuguese wife, protected against procuring, has the right to take vengeance on his husband for her honor, whereas the Spanish wife does not have that right. Keywords: Spanish Penal Code 1822/1848/1850. Portuguese Penal Code 1852. Woman. Fragilitas. Honesty.

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)0.002
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.014
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.295
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Portuguesa de HistóriaSame topicCriminal Justice and PenologyFrench-language works237,207