Bibliographic record
Abstract
Criminal Law is a species of political and moral philosophy.Its central question is justifying the use of the state's coercive power against free and autonomous persons.The link with moral philosophy derives from one answer to the problem of justifying the use of state power.If the rationale or a limiting condition of criminal punishment is personal desert, then legal theory invariably interweaves with philosophical claims about wrongdoing, culpability, justifying circumstances and excuses.Criminal Law Sourcebook presents cases and materials illustrating the statutory and judicial practices of criminal law in the common law states of Australia.The authors of this book on Criminal Law Sourcebook lead the reader on an interesting and useful journey through the terrain of research design, they strike just the right balance between theory and practice, detail and generality.Criminal Law Sourcebook is a thoughtful, well written and comparative study on the common law jurisdictions (New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and the Australian Capital territory) and the Code Jurisdictions (Queensland, Western Australia, Tasmania, and the Northern territory).It is nice to see the emergence of more works such as Criminal Law Sourcebook that use comparative analysis to examine developments in the related Australian criminal laws.The authors in their introduction do a good job of setting the scene and justifying the selection of topics.Their intention is to transcend the existential discontinuities that exist between the states and territories in Australia.Moreover, the parliaments in each of the states and territories have transformed the form and content of discrete areas of the substantive criminal law.Similarly, the judicial interpretations of criminal statutes and the common law of crime 392
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 | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.368 | 0.277 |
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".