Қазақстан Республикасының қылмыстық заңнамасында жазаны тағайындау институты: теория және практика
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article provides a comprehensive analysis of the theoretical and practical aspects of the institution of sentencing in the criminal legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The main objective of the study is to examine the structure of sentencing rules, including their general and special principles, as well as to identify problematic issues arising in judicial practice and the application of law. The study systematically considers the need to account for the primary purpose of punishment, its nature, the individual characteristics of the convicted person, the severity of the crime, and its level of social danger. Based on legal statistics and specific court cases, the article analyzes how offenses such as damage to public property, hooliganism, vandalism, and other violations are addressed in judicial practice. Historical, formal-logical, and comparative methods were employed, allowing the identification of the theoretical foundations of sentencing and highlighting similarities and differences between domestic and foreign practices. In conclusion, the institution of sentencing is recognized as a crucial legal mechanism ensuring fair and proportionate court decisions, reducing social danger, and contributing to the rehabilitation of offenders. The study emphasizes the interaction between legal theory and practice and provides recommendations for improving sentencing principles in criminal law enforcement.
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.010 |
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; both teacher heads 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".