MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780881372 · doi:10.18192/jpp.v26i1-2.2286

Prisoners’ Legal Services on Segregation

2017· article· en· W2780881372 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Simon Cheung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Prisoners on Prisons · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminologyLegal serviceComputer securityLawBusinessPolitical scienceLaw and economicsComputer sciencePsychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

T here is an abundance of horror stories about the practice of solitary confi nement, and plenty of voices calling for its end as a cruel and counter-rehabilitative practice.However, there have also been scant few full-scale proposals detailing exactly how solitary confi nement could be eliminated in Canada.In an eff ort to change this, on 28 November 2016 Prisoners' Legal Services (PLS) released Solitary: A Case for Abolition -a 112-page report that off ers a variety of solutions supported by historical research, academic articles and precedents from other jurisdictions -to address the issues currently responded to using solitary confi nement.The primary purpose of the report is to initiate discussions aimed at fi nally ending solitary confi nement, also known as segregation and separate confi nement in the Canadian federal and British Columbian prison systems respectively.The scale and complexity of such a process is not lost on PLS.We understand the process will likely take years of reform.However, Solitary: A Case for Abolition contains a comprehensive collection of current research and recommendations that, if implemented, could form a fi rm foundation for future dialogue in working committees or meetings between correctional organizations and stakeholders like PLS.PLS is a legal clinic located in Burnaby, British Columbia that started off as a branch offi ce of the BC Legal Services Society (BC legal aid) in 1980 and continued as a Legal Services Society-funded non-profi t in 2002.Executive Director Jennifer Metcalfe oversees a small team of legal advocates and administrative staff who strive to further the organization's mandate of protecting British Columbian prisoners' liberty rights as enshrined under section seven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.Under this section, individuals in Canada are protected from government-imposed deprivation of their right to life, liberty and security of the person except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.Complaints regarding solitary confi nement -defi ned by the United Nations as "the confi nement of prisoners for 22 hours or more a day without meaningful human contact" -from prisoners in both federal and provincial institutions across BC are commonly raised at PLS.On a day-to-day basis, PLS provides a range of support for clients in such circumstances: summary advice over one of our six phone lines; written advocacy; and

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.000

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 head0.345
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designQualitative
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 abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Prisoners on PrisonsSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207