MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972441288 · doi:10.7202/012661ar

L’enquête criminelle

2006· article· fr· W1972441288 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminologie · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical and Scientific Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInternational Centre for Comparative Criminology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’enquête de police judiciaire constitue, d’après une étude récente de Skogan et Frydl (2003), l’un des objets les moins étudiés dans le champ des études sur la police. Cet article énonce certains des résultats d’une étude effectuée dans 153 dossiers d’homicide montés de 1990 à 2001 par un grand corps policier québécois. Le texte est divisé en quatre parties : (1) on propose d’abord un rapide bilan des écrits sur l’enquête de police judiciaire ; (2) le projet de recherche est ensuite présenté en faisant état de quelques difficultés d’ordre méthodologique ; (3) une taxinomie des principaux types d’enquête de police judiciaire est dressée, qui révèle que les enquêtes recèlent une diversité jusqu’ici relativement inaperçue ; (4) finalement des résultats empiriques sont énoncés, en particulier en ce qui a trait au temps consacré par les enquêteurs pour résoudre les affaires, aux facteurs les plus opérants dans la résolution des affaires et au rôle de la police scientifique et de l’expertise.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.009

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 head0.400
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.045 · 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