El impacto del código general disciplinario en el reglamento del régimen disciplinario para las fuerzas militares
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Con la sanción del Nuevo Código General Disciplinario, se regulan varios temas a saber: en primer lugar se debe resaltar el esfuerzo del legislador por ampliar y organizar la estructura del Nuevo Código es así como se estructuró una parte General y una parte Especial, en la segunda parte se regulan novedosas figuras como; la Confesión, el Testimonio, la Peritación, la Inspección Disciplinaria, los documentos, el indicio, la unificación del procedimiento con la instalación y adelantamiento de la audiencia. Sin duda estos modernos temas ameritan una oportunidad desde la academia para establecer en el tema de los militares ¿cuál será el impacto que genera la aplicación del Nuevo Código General Disciplinario en el reglamento del Régimen Disciplinario para las Fuerzas Militares?2 Este paradigma genera la necesidad de expedir un nuevo Régimen para las Fuerzas Militares, sin duda será un escenario oportuno para demandar la acuciosidad del órgano legislativo en busca de una tutela judicial efectiva y acceso oportuno y sin dilaciones injustificadas a la administración de justicia (fix-zamudio 1974,pg.23).
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".