Analisis Penggunaan Hipnosis Forensik Sebagai Metode Komplementer Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Pada Pemeriksaan Saksi Dalam Proses Penyidikan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To find out and analyze the use of forensic hypnosis as a method of examining witnesses in proving criminal acts in other countries. To find out and analyze the use of forensic hypnosis as a method of examining witnesses in the perspective of proof of criminal acts at the investigative level in IndonesiaThe type of research used is normative juridical. The focus of the normative approach is to find, analyze and then formulate norms for the use of hypnosis. While the focus of the juridical approach is to explain the use of forensic hypnosis in several countries by referring to legal concepts or expert opinions, legal principles or principles and legal sources that apply universally.Whereas forensic hypnosis has been used as a method of examining witnesses in the investigative process in the United States, Canada and Hong Kong where information from the results of forensic hypnosis is used by investigators to search for, collect evidence and strengthen evidence. Meanwhile, de jure court decisions in each country that recognize the use of forensic hypnosis is a source of jurisprudence and legal legitimacy for applying forensic hypnosis as a method of examining witnesses in proving criminal offenses at the investigative level in Indonesia. Whereas the use of forensic hypnosis as a method of examining witnesses in the perspective of proving a crime at the level of investigation in Indonesia is no different from the method of examining witnesses in the investigation process in general. As a complementary method, it consists of 4 (four) stages namely pre-induction, induction, suggestion and termination where implicitly the use of forensic hypnosis as a method of examining witnesses in the investigation process is a manifestation of the investigator's enthusiasm in carrying out other actions according to law.In order to further strengthen and optimize the existence of the use of forensic hypnosis as a method of examining witnesses in the investigative process in Indonesia, it is hoped that the legislature will provide confirmation on the use of forensic hypnosis which must be contained in statutory regulations or in standard procedures.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.003 |
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".