Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este articulo asume que los antecedentes penales suponen un serio obtaculo para la reintegracion laboral de las personas que han cumplido una condena. Se presume que esta reinsercion es mas dificil en los paises en que se dan tres condiciones: los antecedentes penales son publicos y facilmente accesibles, los empresarios estan obligados a llevar a cabo controles antes de contratar a sus empleados, y los antecedentes penales no se cancelan. El articulo se centra en la legislacion espanola referida a los empleos para los cuales se exige la presentacion de un certificado de antecedentes penales (CAP), e intenta averiguar en que casos esta permitido solicitarlos y en cuales esta prohibido. Dado que en el ano 2010 se han realizado un millon y medio de peticiones al Registro Central de Penados (RCP) en Espana nuestra duda es si tambien aqui los antecentes penales representan un mayor obstaculo del imaginado a la reinsercion laboral.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".