MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339834982

Corrections and juvenile delinquency in the Kingdom of Swaziland : an exploratory study

2015· article· en· W2339834982 on OpenAlexaff
Luke M. Malindisa, John Winterdyk

Bibliographic record

VenueActa criminologica · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJuvenile delinquencyJuvenileCriminologyPrisonExploratory researchIndependence (probability theory)WelfareEconomic JusticePolitical sciencePsychologySocioeconomicsSociologySocial scienceLawEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since gaining its independence in 1968 and the establishment of the Prison Act, there has been increasing recognition that corrections and the welfare of juvenile delinquents in Swaziland has been fraught with a wide range of challenges. In 2013, the Department of Correctional Services, for the first time, undertook a descriptive and exploratory study examining social background patterns of detained juvenile delinquents to establish a profile of juvenile delinquency in Swaziland. Data was collected from all 304 juveniles at Malkerns Industrial School in the rural town of Malkerns. A closed-ended survey with 33 questions was used to collect the data. Overall, the results showed that juvenile offenders in Swaziland have many of the same social challenges as do young offenders in most other parts of the world. The results provided the foundation for a number of recommendations on how Swaziland can consider moving forward in reforming its juvenile justice practices.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa criminologicaSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207