MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151258066 · doi:10.7202/007864ar

Le monde judiciaire selon Garfinkel

2004· article· fr· W2151258066 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminologie · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLegal Systems and Institutions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtSociologyEthnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1949 : H. Garfinkel publie dans Social Forces un article intitulé Research note on inter- and intra-racial homicides , lequel doit « en premier lieu, fournir des matériaux relatifs au traitement réservé aux auteurs blancs et noirs impliqués dans des homicides inter ou intraraciaux, et en second lieu, soumettre une hypothèse qui rende compte des particularités des données mises en évidence lorsque les différents indicateurs de traitement […] sont classés selon la race de l’auteur et de la victime ». Il y montre comment la différenciation raciale du travail pénal reproduit la structuration raciale de la société. Le monde judiciaire selon Garfinkel décrit dans un premier temps les termes et l’articulation de la démonstration à laquelle Garfinkel se livre dans cette étude. Dans un deuxième temps, il explicite le choix de raison où son interprétation de la différenciation raciale du travail pénal s’enracine, avant d’en tirer, dans un troisième temps, les implications pour l’étude du droit, du crime et de la discrimination.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.007

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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.115 · 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