MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301817208 · doi:10.4000/champpenal.8351

Le traitement de la « dangerosité » en Belgique : internement et mise à la disposition du gouvernement

2022· article· fr· W4301817208 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Mary, Dan Kaminski, Eric Maes, Françoise Vanhamme

Bibliographic record

VenueChamp pénal · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical and Scientific Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis 1930, la Belgique dispose de deux mécanismes permettant soit l’allongement de certaines peines, soit l’indétermination de leur durée. Il s’agit, d’une part, de l’internement des délinquants anormaux et, d’autre part, de la mise à la disposition du gouvernement des récidivistes et délinquants d’habitude. En complément des autres présentations nationales du séminaire du GERN « Longues peines et peines indéfinies. Punir la dangerosité », l’objet de cette contribution est double : présenter le cadre normatif de ces mécanismes en en soulignant les grands enjeux tels qu’ils apparurent notamment dans les débats entre juristes et médecins ; juger de l’effectivité de ces mécanismes en examinant, tant que faire se peut, l’usage qui en a été fait.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChamp pénalSame topicHistorical and Scientific StudiesFrench-language works237,207