DOPING AS A GLOBAL PROBLEM OF THE 21ST CENTURY ON ACCOUNT OF ITS ILLEGAL INFLUENCE ON THE RESULTS OF OFFICIAL SPORTS COMPETITIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".