Police et itinérance à Montréal : analyse des constats d’infraction aux règlements municipaux, 2005-2009
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les interventions policières à l’égard des personnes itinérantes font souvent l’objet de contestations sur la place publique, en particulier lorsqu’il y a émission de constats d’infraction en vertu des règlements municipaux. L’analyse présentée explore la surreprésentation de la population itinérante de Montréal parmi les personnes qui ont reçu au moins un constat d’infraction, pour la période 2005-2009. Les résultats indiquent que les personnes itinérantes reçoivent en moyenne trois fois plus de constats que la population non itinérante. Par contre, les trois quarts d’entre elles ne courraient pas le risque de recevoir un constat d’infraction au cours d’une année. Les résultats obtenus mettent en perspective la vision alarmiste souvent véhiculée par les médias.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".