MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2781254887 · doi:10.1177/1461355717748973

What do police do and where do they do it?

2017· article· en· W2781254887 on OpenAlex
Kathryn Wuschke, Martin A. Andresen, P. Jeffrey Brantingham, Christopher Rattenbury, Andrew Richards

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Police Science & Management · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkloadCriminologyPolice departmentPopulationPublic relationsPolitical scienceSociologyDemographyEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent research in the economics of policing has been concerned with what the police do and how much time they spend on those activities. Some of this research has highlighted that, based on the number of incidents, “crime” comprises only ∼ 20% of the police workload with much of the remaining 80% addressing public safety concerns. In this article, we deconstruct the nature of police incidents within a suburban city. We show that police expenditures, relative to the entire municipal budget, have been relatively constant over 30 years and that the volume of police activity has also remained relatively constant, although with a slight increasing trend. We show that the most of the decrease in crime can be attributed to population growth in this suburban city and that the places in which the police undertake different activities vary.

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.

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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.384 · 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