Perbandingan Hukum Tindak Pidana Aborsi di Indonesia dengan Kebijakan Praktik Aborsi di Kanada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to compare the legal framework governing the criminal offense of abortion in Indonesia with the policy on abortion practices in Canada. Using the comparative law method, this analysis investigates aspects of the law relating to abortion, including laws, regulations, and court decisions in both countries. Cultural, religious and social factors are also considered in the context of the different legal approaches to abortion in the two countries. The results highlight significant differences in legal approaches and societal views towards abortion between Indonesia and Canada. The implications of this comparison are discussed to enrich the understanding of abortion law and generate ideas for policy reforms or adjustments appropriate to each country's context. This research contributes to a global understanding of the legal and moral issues related to abortion and provides a foundation for further discussion in developing more effective and humane policies related to abortion at the national and international levels.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it