Fundamentos para una estrategia metodológica de aplicación de la jurisprudencia constitucional en el sistema judicial del Ecuador
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El presente artículo aborda los fundamentos teóricos del proceso de recepción de la jurisprudencia constitucional por parte de la jurisdicción ordinaria, en el contexto del modelo jurídico político instaurado por la Constitución de 2008 y la incidencia del neoconstitucionalismo y del Estado constitucional de derechos y justicia en la configuración de la nueva estructura del sistema de fuentes del Derecho en el Ecuador. Se examina la forma y condiciones en que debe desenvolverse la aplicación de la jurisprudencia constitucional como fuente formal y directa y el rol que tienen los jueces ordinarios en la concreción de los contenidos, principios y valores de la Constitución para superar la arraigada cultura del positivismo jurídico, el legalismo, el formalismo y la aplicación del literalismo normativo. Se plantea, a partir de determinados fundamentos teóricos, la necesidad de diseñar una estrategia metodológica para la aplicación de la jurisprudencia constitucional en la impartición de justicia en el Ecuador, en correspondencia con los nuevos paradigmas del ordenamiento jurídico nacional.
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 | 0.015 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".