MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Chapter V. Examples Of Domestic Laws Of countries Permitting Some corporal Punishment Of Children

2006· book-chapter· en· W912042740 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Susan H. Bitensky

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporal punishmentLawPolitical scienceSupreme courtPunishment (psychology)Principle of legalityState (computer science)CriminologyEconomic JusticePsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter focuses on the United States and Canada as providing sufficient exemplars of legalized parental and other corporal punishment of children. The author has selected the United States because the subject of corporal punishment of children is mostly regulated by states, rather than by the national government, and since there are fifty states, the United States is a plentiful source of variations on the theme. And, he has selected Canada inasmuch as its Supreme Court recently issued a decision on the legality of corporal punishment of children that is emblematic of the piecemeal reforms some countries are experimenting with. The chapter presents a representative sampling of American state laws, as well as a few relevant federal laws, on corporal punishment of children. The high Court's opinion acknowledges that there is a principle of fundamental justice that accused must enjoy adequate procedural protections in the criminal justice system.Keywords: Canada; corporal punishment of children; criminal justice system; domestic laws; United States

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.516

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare→French-language works237,207→