MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172239344 · doi:10.6000/1929-4409.2021.10.26

A Criminological Outlook of Cyber Crimes in Sexual Violence Against Children in Indonesian Laws

2021· article· en· W3172239344 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
I Nyoman Juwita Arsawati, I Made Wirya Darma, Putu Eva Ditayani Antari

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Criminology and Sociology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Social Justice Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCybercrimeChild pornographySanctionsLawCyberspacePornographyNormativeCriminologyCriminal codeGovernment (linguistics)Criminal lawThe InternetPolitical sciencePsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to analyze the cybercrimes in sexual violence against children in Indonesian laws. Act Number 11 of 2008 concerning Information and Electronic Transactions, concerning cybercrime specifically regulated in Indonesia. Of the various types of cybercrime that occur in Indonesia, it is interesting to study the vacuum norms governing cyber pornography carried out on children in Act Number 11 of 2008 concerning Information and Electronic Transactions. The crime can be said as violence against children whose punishment can be aggravated as stipulated in the Child Protection Act. This research is a normative legal study by examining the absence of norms in the ITE Law regarding sanctions imposed on perpetrators of child abuse in cyberspace. The study was conducted by using normative research methods so that utilizing primary legal materials such as the Criminal Code, Child Protection Act, Pornography Law, and Electronic Information and Transaction Law. Based on the collection and analysis of the legal material, the results showed that there is a need for criminal penalties for cyber pornography against children. This is done by considering the impact of the crime on the development of children and aims that the perpetrators deter and prevent similar crimes. The results practically contribute that the government is expected to play an active role in continuing to provide protection and assistance for psychological recovery from victims.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Criminology and SociologySame topicLegal and Social Justice StudiesFrench-language works237,207