MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963737966 · doi:10.1007/s10979-009-9180-1

Predicting recidivism amongst sexual offenders: A multi-site study of Static-2002.

2009· article· en· W1963737966 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLaw and Human Behavior · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsPublic Safety Canada
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilWisconsin Department of Health ServicesPublic Safety Canada
KeywordsRecidivismPsychologyDanishSex offenseSample (material)Risk assessmentPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsDemographyClinical psychologySexual abuseEnvironmental healthMedicineComputer securityComputer scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The predictive accuracy of Static-2002 (Hanson & Thornton, Notes on the development of Static-2002 (Corrections Research User Report No. 2003-01), 2003) was examined in eight samples of sexual offenders (five Canadian, one U.S., one U.K., one Danish; total sample of 3,034). Static-2002 showed moderate ability to rank order the risk for sexual, violent and general (any) recidivism (AUCs of .68, .71, and .70, respectively), and was more accurate than Static-99. These findings support the use of Static-2002 in applied assessments. There were substantial differences across samples, however, in the observed sexual recidivism rates. These differences present new challenges to evaluators wishing to use actuarial risk scores to estimate absolute recidivism rates.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.291 · 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