MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1480764717 · doi:10.51644/9781554581573

Crime and Criminal Justice in Europe and Canada

2006· book· en· W1480764717 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHonourDoctrineCriminologyCriminal justiceLawPolitical scienceCriminal lawPunishment (psychology)Economic JusticeInsanityTheory of criminal justiceSociologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How is modern-day thinking about crime different from that of previous centuries? What are the similarities and differences in attitudes and systems between the civil and common law societies of Europe and North America? These and other questions were addressed at an international conference on crime and criminal justice at The University of Calgary attended by historians, professors of law, judges, and criminologists. The essays in Part I consider the evolution of criminal law doctrine, and those in Part II analyse the theory and measurement of crime in the past and at present. Parts III and IV examine the courts and prosecution, and Part V assesses the historical roots of the insanity defence and the theory and practice of punishment. The volume will be of interest, across national boundaries, to historians, sociologists, social workers, lawyers, and persons involved in the administration of justice as well as the general reader concerned about civil rights, social values, and justice. The eighteen contributors include F.H. Baker, J.M. Beattie, W.A. Calder, T.C. Curtis, D. Hay, H. Diederiks, A. Lachance, His Honour W.G. Morrow, A. Soman, and S. Verdun-Jones.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations63
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207