MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2243435101 · doi:10.1177/1748895815584712

Criminology and the Anthropocene

2015· article· en· W2243435101 on OpenAlexaff
Clifford Shearing

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminology & Criminal Justice · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Conservation and Criminology Analyses
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsAnthropoceneGreen criminologySign (mathematics)Corporate governanceMeaning (existential)Environmental ethicsCriminologySociologyEpistemologyCriminal justicePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article explores how criminology is responding to, and might respond to, the challenges presented by changes in earth systems, and the reasons for them, that the term ‘Anthropocene’ signals. It begins with a very brief review of these developments and the meaning of the term. It then examines the responses within criminology that have emerged under the sign ‘green criminology’. Thereafter it explores how criminology might respond to the challenges of the Anthropocene by using a ‘security governance’ lens.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.030
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations63
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminology & Criminal JusticeSame topicWildlife Conservation and Criminology AnalysesFrench-language works237,207