Le cycle de la violence physique : trajectoire sociale et cheminement personnel de la violence individuelle et de groupe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is about interpersonal physical violence. The description of the course of violent crimes in Quebec, based on official statistics and surveys, shows an increase in these crimes and in gang fighting, but the level is equivalent to that we had already known. There are a number of factors responsible for this situation — recent immigration, the reappearance of adolescent gangs and certain social changes. An analysis of interpersonal violence by means of a longitudinal study of individuals shows that it is an activity of the youth, not often repeated and of short duration, which is preceded by other criminal activities. It has been established that there is a strong continuity between agressive acts in early childhood, fighting during adolescence and violent crimes during adulthood. It has also been shown that the appearance of this type of conduct can be predicted under certain conditions. The results call for several preventive measures: the integration of young immigrants, the development of mechanisms for adolescent conviviality, support during the transition from school to the workplace and energetic control of adolescent gangs. Concerning action with regard to individuals, we discuss early discovery of persons at risk and specific types of intervention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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".