MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046497542 · doi:10.7202/017216ar

L’impact de la réaction policière sur l’évolution de vols avec violence

2005· article· en· W2046497542 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Daniel Élie, Anne Kapétanaki-Barake

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminologie · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsInternational Centre for Comparative Criminology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaViolent crimeCriminologyMetropolitan policeCrime rateCrime statisticsStatistical analysisPolitical scienceGeographyDemographySociologyStatisticsMathematicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This descriptive and comparative study analyses the effectiveness of police activity on the evolution of robbery and armed robbery in four Canadian provinces and five metropolitan areas. The statistical data used were those furnished by Statistics Canada on cases of robbery, armed robbery, the clearance rate and the number of persons charged with these crimes. The evaluation of police effectiveness was made by analysing the variation in the rate of solution on the rate of crime and the rate of the number of persons accused on the rate of crime. The analysis showed that the influence of police action on the control of robbery and armed robbery, as expresses by the clearance rates is almost the same from one province or metropolitan area to another. Furthermore, the effectiveness of police action seems to depend on the volume of crime that the police have to cope with. Also, the analysis of the variation in the clearance rate and the rate of persons accused in relation to the rate of crime showed that an increase in the volume of crime is independent of the efforts made by the police.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminologieSame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207