MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093299275

The relationship between homicide co-victims and justice: The great misunderstanding

2014· article· en· W3093299275 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Catherine Rossi

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de la Justice · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomicideCompensation (psychology)Criminal justiceCriminologyEconomic JusticePolitical sciencePosition (finance)LawSociologyPsychologySocial psychologyPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent legal provisions have strongly endeavored to defend criminal victims' viewpoint, both in Quebec and France, two counties this survey compares. This prompts a tension between victims' advocates and critics. Beyond this debate, what is the real position of homicide co-victims? They do not seek revenge but wish rather to be considered as full victims, as well as representatives of the deceased, and acknowledged as such by the compensation and the penalty. Such symbolic acknowledgment should come from the whole judicial system, not only with its decisions, but primarily through relations which its members hold with these persons. It is finally essential that this acknowledgment become also a social one, beyond the borders of the criminal justice system.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de la JusticeSame topicHealth, Medicine and SocietyFrench-language works237,207