Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the reception of the Roman institute ofaequitas, canon law has steadily transformed it in order to make it an essential instrument within the canonical system, notably in those matters which concern the contribution of the law to the economy of salvation. In surveying the various discussions on the specific nature of canonical equity, the A. shows the intrisic link that this juridic institution maintains with the salus animarum. The hypothesis of the A. is that the invocation of canonical equity must manifest the mystery of the Church whose dual dimensions of the temporal and spiritual are placed at the service of humanity and for the needs of better justice in this world, as well as in view of its eschatological destiny. In this dynamic, the salus animarum must shed light on recourse to canonical equity. Thus, always keeping in view that one can choose avisedly to soften a juridic norm, or, contrariwise to apply it strictly. Finally, the relationship between canonical equity and the salus animarum translates concretely to the pastoral dimension of the law of the Church. Thus, in the softening of the application of norms or increasing certain penalties, there is always kept in view the spiritual well-being of persons.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 it