Transformations of Policing. Edited by Alistair Henry and David J.Smith (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007, 336pp. 55.00)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Police and People in London (PPL) was a groundbreaking piece of research published in four volumes in 1983. Combining ethnographical and survey methodologies, it was unusual for the time due to the breadth of its scope and the access that it had to the Metropolitan Police (the ‘Met'). Its findings were controversial and its publication was delayed due to its potential political impact at a time when the 1984 Police and Criminal Evidence Act was being navigated through Parliament and the Met themselves were under severe scrutiny due to the recently published Scarman Report into the riots in Brixton in 1981. PPL was an important, timely and influential piece of work, but what does it mean today? Alastair Henry and David J. Smith (one of the architects of PPL) have collected in this volume 12 essays on how policing has changed since PPL was published. Each of the essays engages with the social changes that have occurred since PPL's publication and uses this to discuss issues that have come to prominence in police research during that period. Each chapter is excellent as a standalone review of the particular topic it covers, but, taken together, they give a fascinating insight into the growth of the police, the challenges they face, the metamorphosis of the society in which they work and the variety of competing forms of policing which have all developed in the quarter century since PPL's publication.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.009 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".