MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984641668 · doi:10.1093/bjc/azp015

Under These Conditions: Gender, Parole and the Governance of Reintegration

2009· article· en· W1984641668 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe British Journal of Criminology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceCriminal justiceCriminologyEconomic JusticePower (physics)Political sciencePsychologySubject (documents)LawBusinessComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the widespread use of conditions in various phases of the criminal justice system (e.g. bail, probation, parole), there has been little theoretical examination of their purposes or the implications associated with their use. This paper extends the theoretical discussion of women prisoners’ reintegration by focusing on parole conditions as a form of ‘targeted governance’. Using national data on federally sentenced female offenders in Canada, it shows how parole boards constitute the female parolee as a fractured subject consisting of various ‘risk/need factors’ to which parole conditions are applied. It also considers how conditions are techniques of targeted governance that exemplify an integrated exercise of penal power, which is simultaneously productive and repressive: conditions help prepare women prisoners for ‘freedom’ on parole by mobilizing particular techniques of self-governance, while at the same time operate as modes of surveillance that police the boundaries of acceptable conduct.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.270 · 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