Poder judicial y autonomía de los órganos constitucionales: El singular caso italiano de la autodichia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La protección judicial de los derechos de los empleados de los órganos constitucionales en el sistema constitucional italiano se realiza por medio de jueces establecidos dentro de cada órgano. La palabra "autodichia" indica precisamente la facultad de los Órganos constitucionales para juzgar de forma independiente de las disputas que puedan afectar sus actividades internas. La posibilidad de sustraer las disputas laborales con los empleados al conocimiento del juez común, además de ser una expresión de una idea anacrónica de la soberanía, está en contraste con las garantías previstas en la Constitución sobre la independencia y la imparcialidad del juez, como requisito previo para la protección efectiva de los ciudadanos. Por esta razón, se opina de superar el sistema autodichia en vigor en Italia, en favor de la protección efectiva de los derechos por los tribunales ordinarios.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".