A Validation Study of the Child Pornography Offender Risk Tool (CPORT)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Child Pornography Offender Risk Tool (CPORT) is a seven-item structured tool to assess the likelihood of future sexual offending over a 5-year fixed follow-up. The current study examined 5-year fixed follow-up data (15% any new sexual offense, 9% any new child pornography offense) for a validation sample of 80 men convicted of child pornography offense(s). Although statistical power was low, results were comparable with the development sample: The CPORT had slightly lower predictive accuracy for sexual recidivism for the overall group (area under the curve [AUC] = .70 vs. .74), but these values were not significantly different. Combining the development and validation samples, the CPORT predicted any sexual recidivism (AUC = .72) and child pornography recidivism specifically (AUC = .74), with similar accuracies. CPORT was also significantly predictive of these outcomes for the child pornography offenders with no known contact offenses. Strengths and weaknesses of incorporating CPORT into applied risk assessments are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.040 | 0.076 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".