MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407363581 · doi:10.33115/udg_bib/qf.i8.23046

causalidad y normatividad en la prueba tributaria

2025· article· es· W4407363581 on OpenAlexaff
Serrana Delgado Manteiga

Bibliographic record

VenueQuaestio facti Revista internacional sobre razonamiento probatorio · 2025
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal processes and jurisprudence
Canadian institutionsOptech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El presente artículo aborda el problema de la regla de exclusión probatoria cuando se aplica al caso de la prueba tributaria. Enfatiza en que, dado que las Administraciones Tributarias desarrollan procedimientos de obtención de prueba para los que gozan de prerrogativas especiales que no tienen los particulares, se impone distinguir entre la causalidad y la normatividad de la prueba. Basándome en los conceptos de reglas constitutivas e institucionales y en la distinción entre acción y descripción de la acción, concluyo en que un mismo hecho probatorio puede ser una prueba lícita o ilícita según el marco institucional en el que se inserta y que es necesario distinguir conexión causal de conexión normativa (entendida esta última como algo diferente a la conexión de antijuridicidad que construyó la dogmática y la jurisprudencia).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuaestio facti Revista internacional sobre razonamiento probatorioSame topicLegal processes and jurisprudenceFrench-language works237,207