Enfance et détention correctionnelle. Le cas du tribunal des jeunes de Winnipeg entre 1930 et 1959
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1908, the first Canadian juvenile court was established in Winnipeg. The study of the functioning of this court during the period 1930-1959 shows that the judicial process and the sentencing decisions were in relation with two different approaches to delinquency. The first approach is the criminal one. Conceptually, this approach is close to the justice model, borrowed from adult courts which operate with retribution and deterrence. The second approach is the socio-penal approach. This approach is linked to the legal (and social) status of children characterized by the obligations of acceptable adult supervision, fixed place of residence, restrained presence in public places and sexual moralization. It includes types of delinquencies for which adults cannot be incriminated and delinquencies related to contacts with the Court. The sentencing of girls and boys whose files correspond to the criminal model is characterized by the recourse to fining, reprimand, probation and restitution while those whose files match the socio-penal model are punished by correctional detention, probation, release and fine.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".