MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2286525259

Independent Legal Representation for Victims of Sexual Assault: A Model for Delivery of Legal Services

2005· article· en· W2286525259 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wilson Larry

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Evidence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdversarial systemSexual assaultLegislatureCriminal justicePolitical scienceEconomic JusticeRepresentation (politics)CriminologyLegal processProcess (computing)PsychologyLawSocial psychologyPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsMedicinePoliticsMedical emergencyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite a number of legislative initiatives designed to address the problem, the fact remains that in Canada today very few victims of sexual assault report the offence to police. The primary reason, which underlies the decision to remain silent, is a fear of our criminal justice system. Victims who do choose to come forward are often frustrated and angry with the experience. Complaints about the legal process tend to focus on the lack of information and communication from officials, and the very limited opportunity for victims of crime to actively participate in the judicial process. In this paper the author examines these issues and develops a model which will provide independent legal representation for victims of sexual assault. The model recognizes and respects the rights of the accused and our adversarial system of criminal justice. At the same time, the proposal seeks to encourage participation, facilitate meaningful and effective participation, and advance the rights and interests of victims of sexual assault.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicCriminal Law and EvidenceFrench-language works237,207