MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076886656 · doi:10.1520/jfs2003287

Crime Scene Ethics: Souvenirs, Teaching Material, and Artifacts

2004· article· en· W2076886656 on OpenAlexaffabout
T. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forensic Sciences · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicForensic and Genetic Research
Canadian institutionsDairy Farmers of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppearance of improprietyCrime scenePermissionProperty (philosophy)Value (mathematics)Intellectual propertyCriminologyPsychologyLawInternet privacyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Police and forensic specialists are ethically obliged to preserve the integrity of their investigations and their agencies' reputations. The American Academy of Forensic Sciences and the Canadian Society of Forensic Science provide no guidelines for crime scene ethics, or the retention of items from former crime scenes. Guidelines are necessary to define acceptable behavior relating to removing, keeping, or selling artifacts, souvenirs, or teaching specimens from former crime scenes, where such activities are not illegal, to prevent potential conflicts of interest and the appearance of impropriety. Proposed guidelines permit the retention of objects with educational value, provided they are not of significance to the case, they are not removed until the scene is released, permission has been obtained from the property owner and police investigator, and the item has no significant monetary value. Permission is necessary even if objects appear discarded, or are not typically regarded as property, e.g., animal bones.

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 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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Forensic SciencesSame topicForensic and Genetic ResearchFrench-language works237,207