MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139829485 · doi:10.1177/0093854811406224

An Empirically Derived Classification System for Juvenile Firesetters

2011· article· en· W2139829485 on OpenAlexaff
Giannetta Del Bove, Sherri MacKay

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Justice and Behavior · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArsonRecidivismUnivariatePsychologyPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsJuvenileTypologyJuvenile delinquencyInjury preventionClinical psychologyEnvironmental healthPsychiatryMedicineComputer scienceCriminologyGeographyMachine learningBiologyEcologyMultivariate statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the heterogeneity of juvenile firesetters, the literature lacks empirically based classification systems. Existing typologies have been descriptive, arbitrarily segregate subtypes based on univariate characteristics, and lack empirical validation. In the present investigation, cluster analysis was used to develop a classification of juvenile firesetters based on both fire-specific and general individual and environmental variables associated to firesetting severity and recidivism. Participants included 240 firesetters aged 4 to 17 and primary caretakers who were referred to The Arson Prevention Program for Children. Findings indicate that juvenile firesetters are a heterogeneous group that can be empirically separated into conventional-limited, home-instability-moderate, and multi-risk-persistent firesetters. These subtypes differ on fire-specific characteristics, individual and environmental variables, and firesetting recidivism and general outcome. The implications of this classification system for conducting fire-risk assessments and implementing prevention and treatment strategies are also 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.242
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations27
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminal Justice and BehaviorSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207