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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Suicide rates among inmate populations in prisons are considerably higher than in the general population. Suicide prevention is a common need among penal institutions around the world. Traditional approaches involving only correctional staff in suicide prevention efforts have proven to have their limitations. The involvement of inmates in peer prevention efforts seems to be a reasonable alternative approach. This study examines such a program, called SAMS in the Pen, operated jointly between the prison and the Samaritans of Southern Alberta. This service, the first of its kind in Canada, involved inmate volunteers, known as SAMS, who were trained in listening skills, suicide prevention, and risk assessment. Data was collected for the research from volunteers, correctional staff, general inmate population, and professional staff. However, given the low absolute number in the one institution where the study was carried out, statistical analyses were not practical. As with any new service, the SAMS in the Pen experienced some developmental problems but was perceived to be a worthwhile service to both inmates and staff of the prison.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it