O PAPEL DA JUSTIÇA RESTAURATIVA NA VIDA DE MULHERES PRIVADAS DE LIBERDADE NO MUNICÍPIO DE PORTO VELHO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article analyzes the role of Restorative Justice in the social reintegration of women deprived of liberty, focusing on the female prison system in Porto Velho/Rondônia. The research, exploratory and descriptive in nature, used a qualitative and quantitative approach, based on a bibliographic and documentary survey, including reports from official bodies such as DEPEN and SENAPPEN. The results highlight the complexity of female incarceration in Brazil, marked by social and economic vulnerabilities, and the inefficiency of the traditional punitive model, which contributes to high recidivism rates. Restorative Justice emerges as a promising alternative, focused on repairing harm, dialogue, and accountability, with the potential to mitigate recidivism and promote reintegration. The article concludes with the recommendation of public policies for the implementation of RJ in the female prison system of Porto Velho. It suggests the adoption of models adapted from successful experiences, such as the principles of the APAC Method (Association for the Protection and Assistance of the Convicted) from Minas Gerais and the proven community support model like CoSA (Circles of Support and Accountability) from Canada. The transition from a purely punitive system to one that truly restores lives requires a strategic alliance between public authorities and the community.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".