MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079574634 · doi:10.3406/oss.2008.1273

La violence conjugale au Canada : aspects méthodologiques de l’Enquête sociale générale sur la victimisation

2008· article· en· W2079574634 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julie Sauvé, Marcel Béchard

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté Société et Solidarité · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVictimisationCriminologyPortraitPerceptionPsychologyEconomic JusticeTheme (computing)Social psychologySuicide preventionPoison controlSociologyPolitical scienceGeographyMedical emergencyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A survey on victimization is conducted every five years in Canada as part of the General Social Survey (GSS); the last survey on this topic dates back to 2004. Its aims to collect detailed information on Canadians’ experiences of victimization, their perception of the crime and of the justice system as well as the characteristics of the victim, the incident and the perpetrator of the crime. The theme of spousal violence is one of the permanent components of the survey. It helps to draw up a portrait, from the victim’s perspective, of the nature and repercussions of spousal violence in Canada, among both men and women. The GSS includes, among other things, questions on the frequency of incidents involving spousal violence, the injuries and the reporting of these acts to the police. The results of the 2004 GSS show that, despite the fact that men and women are subject to spousal violence at similar rates, the nature and repercussions of the incidents differ when the two genders are compared. In fact, the consequences of spousal violence are generally more serious for women than for men.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.311 · 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.

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSanté Société et SolidaritéSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207