MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205122901 · doi:10.36740/wlek202111239

DOPING AS A GLOBAL PROBLEM OF THE 21ST CENTURY ON ACCOUNT OF ITS ILLEGAL INFLUENCE ON THE RESULTS OF OFFICIAL SPORTS COMPETITIONS

2021· article· en· W4205122901 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWiadomości Lekarskie · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDoping in Sports
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationLiabilityContext (archaeology)LawLaw enforcementPolitical scienceCommissionEnforcementLanguage changePrinciple of legalityBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim: The study of international and domestic practices of Ukraine concerning the legal regulation of liability for exerting illegal influence on the results of official sports competitions within the context of such means of its commission as the use of doping for the purpose of obtaining additional arguments to emphasize the benefit / the inexpedience of criminalization of such acts as quasi-corruption fraudulent activities. Materials and methods: The article implements doctrinal provisions of domestic and foreign scientific developments in relation to the liability for illegal influence on the results of official sports competitions by means of the use of doping as well as national and foreign criminal legislation, established law enforcement practices, and results of the sociological survey. For such purpose, the authors utilized the methods of analysis and synthesis, a comparative legal method, methods of survey and generalization of viewpoints, research findings. Conclusions: Authors have established the absence of necessity for the introduction of the criminal prohibition in respect of athletes for the use of doping for an entire span of their professional career as well as for the use of doping as the means for exerting illegal influence on the results of official sports competitions. The expedience of further studies has been ascertained by drawing from the experience of the EU, Australia, Canada, USA, and other countries concerning the legal regulation of liability for exerting illegal influence on the results of official sports competitions, legal consequences of the use of doping and corresponding law enforcement practices within the context of grounds and principles of criminalization of socially dangerous acts elaborated by the criminal law studies.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.487

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.272 · 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