The Negative Effects of Alcohol Establishment Size and Proximity on the Frequency of Violent and Disorder Crime across Block Groups of Victoria, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiple studies have associated the density of alcohol establishments with crime. What is not well understood is the influence of establishment patron capacity on the magnitude of crime in an area, or how the spacing of liquor primary establishments impacts crime levels. Using a Poisson spatial lag model, we estimated how patron capacity of on-premises licenses and the total number of off-premises licenses were associated with the frequency of violent and disorder crime occurring on Friday and Saturday nights in Victoria, British Columbia. To identify how the distance between bars and pubs was associated with the frequency of crime within 200 m of each establishment, we applied bivariate curve fitting and change detection techniques. Our model explained 76% percent of the variance in crime frequencies. Bars and pubs within block groups, and in neighboring block groups, had a significant positive association (p < 0.05) with the frequency of crime compared to other on-premises licenses (e.g., restaurants, theatres, clubs, hotels), and off-premises liquor stores. For every additional 1111 bar or pub patron seats the crime frequency per block group is expected to double over a 17 month period (factor of 1.0009 per patron seat). Crime frequency significantly dropped (p < 0.05) around (200 m) bars and pubs that are spaced greater than 300 m apart. Our results provide the first evidenced-based information for evaluating the size and spacing of on-premises licenses in Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".