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
The Government of Canada, in its 2003 changes in the law governing young offenders, managed to appear to be ‘tough on crime’ while, at the same time, attempting to reduce the use of the formal youth justice system. This was accomplished by focusing public statements on tough, symbolic measures that had little impact on the manner in which young offenders were punished while at the same time promoting, in its legislation, attempts to reduce the rates of formal processing and of incarceration of young people. It is understandable, then, that some critics, including academics, who focused on public statements described Canada's new youth law as being unnecessarily harsh. We suggest, on the basis of an analysis of the law and of its administration – including comprehensive sentencing data showing no real increase in punitiveness over the past decade or so – that the law as written and administered is quite different from the way in which it has been described in this journal and in the Canadian mass media. In this way, the Government of Canada was able to have its cake and eat it, too.
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