MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1746476984

Policing with Impunity

2016· article· en· W1746476984 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSocialist register · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpunityAutonomyCoercion (linguistics)Public securitySpace (punctuation)SociologyLawSimple (philosophy)CriminologyPolitical sciencePolitical economyPoliticsComputer scienceEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay emerges from a frustration with two common sense caricatures of police that circulate in left movements. The first portrays the police as the tools of elites, simple enforcers of an exploitative system. In this version, the police are not strategic actors, but merely the brute force of coercion – a force that is thuggish and often bumbling. We blur differences across time and space and suggest that any variation is solely a direct result of economic shifts. At other times, the police are portrayed as autonomous, even omnipotent, strategic players, without examining how relative their autonomy actually is, nor understanding how things might be changing and how and why police strategy varies across time and space. In fact, policing in Canada, the US and the UK is undergoing a broad shift in its logic and strategy. This shift is increasing police impunity, and involves an integration of the previously distinct fields of public and private policing, security and intelligence activities.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score0.860

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.318 · 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