Bibliographic record
Abstract
En este artículo se describen dos casos reales traídos a la practica, en donde podemos observar el estigma social y la falta de conciencia sobre la realidad de las violencias hacia la infancia que todavía persisten en nuestro sistema jurídico y nuestra realidad social. La perspectiva de género a la que se refiere el Tribunal Supremo en numerosas sentencias, en estos dos casos, brilló por su ausencia, puesto que el procedimiento judicial supuso una evidente victimización secundaria y como es tan habitual, la víctima no recibirá nunca la indemnización impuesta, por lo que ni siquiera se la reparará económicamente del grave daño sufrido durante tantos. La víctima sigue siéndolo mucho después de que el delito “haya sido cometido”. La pronta intervención jurídica, la interpretación crítica de las pruebas y la reparación integral deben operar cohesivamente y así garantizar de manera efectiva el interés superior del menor y su protección ante las más graves violencias.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| 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".