MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395954740 · doi:10.5539/ilr.v13n1p11

Analysis on the Behavior Characteristics and Application of the Crime of Network Insult and Libel

2024· article· en· W4395954740 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jingxiao Shao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Law Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEducational Reforms and Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsultCriminologyPsychologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Under the background of the large-scale popularization of network technology, the crime of network insult and libel has become a new form of the traditional crime of insult and libel in the network environment. The number of related cases has increased year by year, encroaching on the network security environment and affecting the social order. However, the two problems exist in the identification of disputes and the application of charges. In order to maintain social governance, it is necessary to provide clear boundaries for identification and to provide applicable charges to avoid cases where convictions are not possible or unclear. This paper mainly analyzes and studies the cases of online insults and defamation published in recent years by means of desktop research. This paper analyzes the behavior characteristics and regulation status of the crime of network insult and libel, and puts forward countermeasures and applicable charges, and distinguishes the applicable situations of the above different charges. It is clear that crimes in the network era should continue to follow up the legal construction, deepen the awareness of legal research, and at the same time, enhance the legal awareness of citizens to build a better society.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Law ResearchSame topicEducational Reforms and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207