MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116483270 · doi:10.1177/0886260504267740

Twenty Years of Progress in Violence Risk Assessment

2004· review· en· W2116483270 on OpenAlexaff
R. Karl Hanson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interpersonal Violence · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsPublic Safety Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk assessmentHuman factors and ergonomicsSuicide preventionInjury preventionPoison controlPsychologyOccupational safety and healthRisk management toolsMedicineMedical emergencyComputer securityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Violence risk assessment has advanced considerably in the last 20 years. In the 1980s, leading professionals questioned the very possibility of valid violence risk assessments; now, many of the major risk factors have been identified, and professional debate focuses on how best to combine these risk factors into meaningful evaluations. An important contributor to this advance in knowledge has been the rise of meta-analytic reviews. Through quantitative summaries, the cumulative findings of small, potentially insignificant studies have provided important answers to questions concerning the effective assessment and treatment of violent offenders.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.366 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations81
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interpersonal ViolenceSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207