MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046425758 · doi:10.1177/0093854806290161

It’s no Riddle, Choose the Middle

2007· article· en· W2046425758 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Justice and Behavior · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfiling (computer programming)OfficerOffender profilingCrime sceneApplied psychologyPsychologyComputer scienceGeographyArtificial intelligenceCriminologyVisualizationArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the effect of the number of crimes and topographical detail on police officer predictions of serial burglars’ home locations. Officers are given 36 maps depicting three, five, or seven crime sites and topographical or no topographical details. They are asked to predict, by marking an X on the map, where they thought each burglar lived. After making their predictions on half of the maps, officers randomly receive either no training or training in one of two simple decision-making strategies. The accuracy of predictions at baseline and retest is measured as the distance between the predicted and actual home locations, and these accuracy scores are compared to a commonly used geographic profiling system. Results show that training significantly improved predictive accuracy, regardless of the number of crime locations or topographical detail presented. In addition, trained participants are as accurate as the geographic profiling system.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.251 · 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