MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163316963 · doi:10.7202/017226ar

L’analyse stratégique et quelques développements récents en criminologie

2005· article· en· W2163316963 on OpenAlex
Maurice Cusson

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminologie · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Illicit Activities, and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminologyValue (mathematics)Vulnerability (computing)SociologyCrime preventionPsychologyOperations researchComputer scienceMathematicsComputer securityStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Strategic analysis views crime as a confrontation and as a mean to an end. It is characterised by : 1) it concentrates on crime; 2) it takes cognizance of the circumstances under which the crime is committed; 3) it presents the crime as a decision influenced by its anticipated results. Felson's routine activity approach, which is similar to strategic analysis, is presented in this article. Other recent developments in criminology have made it possible to present several assertions with a view to explaining certain aspects of theft, in particular, the choice of target. These assertions are : 1) thefts vary according to the opportunities offered potential thieves; 2) opportunity is defined as the contact between a potential criminal and a suitable target; 3) the number of contacts between potential criminals and suitable targets varies directly with the number of targets and their accessibility; 4) the suitability of targets varies in direct proportion to their value and vulnerability. It varies in inverse proportion to their inertia.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.382
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.068 · 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