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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through an analysis of published and unpublished documents authored by or submitted to penal system functionaries, this paper shows how over 6,300 new prisoner beds in the process of coming online in Canada’s provinces and territories are mostly being built to address longstanding growth in the number and proportion of remanded prisoners. The role played by bureaucratic actors and appointed advisors who advanced proposals on how elected officials could address facility crowding and the needs of a so-called changing prisoner profile in a context of risk aversion – including tabling recommendations to construct new prison spaces – is documented. In so doing, it is shown how humanitarian and rehabilitative concerns operate alongside other logics of incarceration that are often said to be more punitive, contributing to the perpetuation of current levels of imprisonment and seeding the ground for future carceral growth. In light of these findings, this paper concludes with a discussion on how recent developments in the Canadian context raise questions about previous scholarly explanations of prison capacity expansion and proposes paths for future research on this topic.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it