Bibliographic record
Abstract
The topic of "warning role in the elimination of foreboding criminal and civil liability" is accepted in almost all of the legal systems but the position given to the warning in the rules and regulations, especially in criminal rules and regulations, differs from a legal system to another.It can be said that in Iran's criminal rules and regulations meanwhile the liability elimination is accepted from a notifier who has observed the conditions of cautioning, it has been case-specifically recounted as "the order by law" and "the ordinance by the legal authority".The present study makes use of a library research method and it comes to the conclusion that although the position of warning has undergone changes and evolutions in the course of legislation but its role in the elimination of cautioning criminal liability has been stabilized dependent on the adherence to the terms and conditions stipulated by a great number of the Islamic penal codes of law approved in 2014 including the Articles 309 and 310 and Notes to the article 308, for instance article 45 of the former law of atonement.It is worth mentioning that the topic of warning had not been taken into consideration in the Islamic punishment codes of law enacted in 1992.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.976 | 0.979 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".