Short-term licence suspensions for drinking drivers: An assessment of effectiveness in Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Short-term (i.e., 12-hour to 24-hour) administrative licence suspensions have been used in Canada for over 20 years as a means to remove from the road those drivers with relatively low blood-alcohol concentrations (BACs) and to provide them with ample time to have their BAC return to zero before their driving privileges are reinstated. The procedure is quick and efficient and is carried out at the side of the road. It provides the police with an efficient tool for dealing decisively with drivers who have consumed relatively small amounts of alcohol but who are not sufficiently impaired to warrant criminal charges. At the same time, the procedure provides swift and certain punishment―two elements required for effective deterrence. Because the procedure is administrative, it avoids the complications, procedural details, and delays imposed by the criminal process and applies an immediate sanction that is considered appropriate for the level of impairment and risk associated with low BACs. Despite the long history and large number of offenders who have been issued short-term suspensions, there has never been a comprehensive and rigorous evaluation of the effect of these laws. The purpose of the present study was to conduct an evaluation of the short-term suspension law in the province of Saskatchewan. This law came into effect on August 1, 1996. It provides the police with the authority to suspend immediately, for a period of 24 hours, the licence of any driver who has a BAC in excess of 0.04%. This report presents the results from four studies: (1) the general deterrent impact, (2) the specific deterrent impact, (3) the characteristics of drivers issued short-term suspensions, and (4) a survey of police officers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".