MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238684945 · doi:10.4000/ifha.8144

Christina Gerstenmayer, Spitzbuben und Erzbösewichter. Räuberbanden in Sachsen zwischen Strafverfolgung und medialer Repräsentation

2014· article· de· W4238684945 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de l’Institut français d’histoire en Allemagne · 2014
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Policy
Canadian institutionsInstitut d'Histoire de l'Amérique Française
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grâce à la richesse de ses archives et à la remarquable activité de sa recherche locale, la Saxe peut être considérée aujourd’hui comme l’un des territoires allemands les mieux étudiés en matière d’histoire sociale de la criminalité et de la justice pénale. Même si le présent ouvrage est issu d’un contexte quelque peu différent – celui du Sonderforschungsbereich 600 « altérité et pauvreté » à l’université de Trèves où a été soutenue en 2011 la thèse dont il est issu – il vient corroborer nos ...

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.005

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 head0.286
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de l’Institut français d’histoire en AllemagneSame topicCriminal Law and PolicyFrench-language works237,207