MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125818355 · doi:10.1177/1088767912442500

A World of Homicides

2012· article· en· W2125818355 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueHomicide Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomicidePovertySocioeconomic statusInequalityDeveloping countryPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsInjury preventionEconomic inequalityDemographic economicsSuicide preventionEconomicsDemographyEnvironmental healthMedicineEconomic growthMathematicsSociologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study contrasts and compares the role of socioeconomic factors that explain variations in the homicide rate for 165 countries in 2010. Regression analyses demonstrate that economic development (GNI), inequality (Gini), and poverty (excess infant mortality) are significant predictors of the homicide rate for all countries. However, subsample analyses shows that income inequality, not economic development or poverty, predicts homicide for countries with a medium level of human development. Also, the variations in homicide for developing countries are inadequately explained by our model. To conclude, an analysis of the countries that exhibited significant discrepancies between their predicted and observed homicide rate is discussed.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.731

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.232
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.262 · 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