Mediación policial y tutela judicial efectiva en la actualidad: reflexiones de una romanista
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No se duda de que el derecho a la tutela judicial efectiva es clave en la conformación del Estado de Derecho, pero también ha impedido la posibilidad de establecer formas de justicia extrajudicial a las que se apela en los últimos tiempos como fórmula de salvación para una Justicia enferma. El estudio de esta cuestión requiere un análisis histórico de las fuentes jurídicas romanas, este será el marco histórico que fundamenta desde un punto de vista dogmático la actividad de la Policía como gestora de conflictos. Así, se pondrá de relieve la importancia del método de los juristas romanos y del trabajo del Pretor –magistrado jurisdiccional- no sólo como antecedentes históricos, sino como elementos esenciales en la configuración del Sistema de Administración de Justicia en el que la mediación ha de ser tratada como uno de sus instrumentos.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.064 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".