MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1552554510 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511500015

Clinical Assessment of Dangerousness

2000· book· en· W1552554510 on OpenAlexaff
Georges-Franck Pinard, Linda S. Pagani

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2000
Typebook
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMental healthField (mathematics)CriminologySocial psychologyApplied psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When people are victimised by violent crime, the general public assumes that the victim could have been spared if the perpetrator had been identified as potentially dangerous by mental health agents. Yet prediction of dangerousness is an inexact science and depends upon many complex factors. This book provides a thorough and clear description of research findings in order to help clinicians make sound decisions concerning their clients' dangerousness. The book covers a broad spectrum of violent behaviour as well as crucial issues such as biological factors, domestic violence, and the influence of alcohol in violent behaviour. The book is divided into the following sections: Basic Issues in Violence Research, Mental Health Issues and Dangerousness, Family Issues and Dangerousness, Individual Characteristics and Dangerousness. It will serve as an important reference book that not only covers scientific literature but provides views on future directions for research and practice in this valuable field.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations71
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207