MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107551026 · doi:10.1177/1077801206293500

Systemic Obstacles to Battered Women's Participation in the Judicial System

2006· article· en· W2107551026 on OpenAlex
J. Roy Gillis, S Diamond, Paul Jebely, Victoria Orekhovsky, Ellis M. Ostovich, Kristin MacIsaac, Sandra Sagrati, Deborah Mandell

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueViolence Against Women · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)AmbivalenceSuicide preventionDomestic violencePoison controlCriminologyHuman factors and ergonomicsPolitical scienceOccupational safety and healthLawMedicineSociologyPsychologyMedical emergencySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian government has introduced numerous policies, guidelines, and mandates at the federal and provincial levels that recognize woman abuse as a serious social problem and violation of the law. Nonetheless, recent feminist research continues to expose laws and practices that fail woman abuse victims. The present study examined the experiences of women victims in domestic violence cases and the barriers they faced in dealing with the police, the courts, and social service agencies. Despite government initiatives, the study results corroborate previous findings indicating that many battered women feel further traumatized by ambivalent or discriminatory attitudes and practices prevalent within the system.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.280 · 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