MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102751811 · doi:10.7202/017420ar

La sécurité privée et le problème de la confiance : l’expérience australienne

2005· article· en· W2102751811 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tim Prenzler

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminologie · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)CausationGeneral partnershipDelegationPrivate securityWork (physics)BusinessPolitical scienceAlliancePublic administrationLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The private security industry in Australia, as in many jurisdictions, has been beset by allegations of fraud, abuse of powers and incompetence. These problems are illustrated through trade practices, prosecutions, government inquiries, incident reports and other sources. Causation is analysed in terms of Shapiro's (1987) formulation of the problem of "policing trust". The substantial delegation of responsibility entailed in security work makes it highly vulnerable to exploitation and fraud, and this potential is exacerbated by the inadequate regulation of security services. Mitigation of these problems is suggested though an enhanced partnership approach of government and the security industry to regulatory control, an through an assessment of the benefits of in-house security.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.294
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminologieSame topicPolicing Practices and PerceptionsFrench-language works237,207