Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les enjeux et les considérations associés à la prise en charge des jeunes contrevenants sont complexes. Les jeunes contrevenants sont loin de former une population homogène ; en conséquence, les modalités de leur prise en charge sont variées. Celles-ci peuvent être conçues comme un continuum de services et d’interventions allant de la simple réprimande policière au placement sous garde en milieu fermé pour les délinquants à haut risque de récidive. S’il est possible de conclure que pour la plupart une intervention d’intensité modérée peut être suffisante, cela n’est pas forcément le cas lorsqu’il est question de la minorité de contrevenants qui est responsable de la majorité des délits. La littérature scientifique a permis de définir des principes à respecter pour mener à bien le processus de réadaptation des jeunes contrevenants. De plus, des programmes d’intervention sont maintenant reconnus comme efficaces. La mise en place de ces programmes implique cependant des enjeux et des défis importants.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".