MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2643573315 · doi:10.4018/ijsvr.2017010106

The Dialogues of Bernie Madoff's Ponzi Fraud

2017· article· en· W2643573315 on OpenAlexaff
Joel West

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Semiotics and Visual Rhetoric · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Deviance, and Social Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecrecyActuarial sciencePsychologyBusinessLaw and economicsCriminologyPolitical scienceLawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bernie Madoff defrauded billions of dollars from his victims. The crime of fraud and the so called sin of greed have been with us throughout known human history. Instead of looking at mere greed as the cause for fraud, this retrospective of Bernie Madoff's fraud will examine the other reasons why, despite multiple warnings and red flags, smart savvy people who had been advised otherwise, still invested with Madoff. The culture of secrecy that Madoff constructed is deconstructed and explained as creating community. As well, the first person account of an academic who specializes in mental lapses, and who invested with Madoff, is given a textual analysis and some lapses are revealed and discounted.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.640
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.357 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Semiotics and Visual RhetoricSame topicCrime, Deviance, and Social ControlFrench-language works237,207