MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783188736 · doi:10.1177/0022042617751685

Shake and Bake: Exploring Drug Producers’ Adaptability to Legal Restrictions Through Online Methamphetamine Recipes

2018· article· en· W2783188736 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Drug Issues · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptabilityMethamphetamineLegislationProduction (economics)Consumption (sociology)BusinessInternet privacyComputer securityRisk analysis (engineering)LawComputer sciencePolitical scienceEconomicsPharmacologyMedicineSociologyManagementMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite numerous regulations, methamphetamine consumption persists; its availability has even increased in the United States. Methamphetamine is produced in small labs and super labs that are differentiated by the quantity of drug they generate and by how they are embedded in trafficking networks. The stagnant statistics regarding methamphetamine consumption and lab seizures suggest that laws have been ineffective, partly due to the producers’ adaptability. To understand this adaptation, methamphetamine recipes collected online will be analyzed through a qualitative methodology. Emphasis will be placed on the impact of the American legislation toward synthetic drug production. This article describes how methamphetamine producers have adapted to get around the regulations. The producers synthesize the regulated precursors by extracting them from processed products. To comply with the quotas imposed by law, the producers limit their quantities used. This article suggests that producers keep abreast of legislations and perfect the recipes accordingly.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.927

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.261 · 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