MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901820682 · doi:10.11575/prism/32572

Youth Gangs in Canada: A Preliminary Review of Programs and Services

2005· review· en· W2901820682 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family (CRILF) was awarded a Crime Prevention Partnership Program grant by the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada to collect and review information on youth gangs in Canada, as well as to identify programs and services aimed at addressing youth involvement in gang activity. The main objectives of this research were to: (1) Develop a multidimensional conceptual framework of youth involvement in gangs, including gangs with connections to organized crime, in the Canadian context. Factors such as the motivations to join a youth gang, recruitment tactics, organization, activities, and exit strategies are considered in the development of a typology that can be utilized to better understand youth gang involvement. (2) Identify programs and services addressing issues relevant to youth gangs in Canada, such as risk factors, recruitment processes, links with organized crime, and exit strategies. Key program components sought include the geographic location of the program, the target group, the objectives and activities of the initiative, the organization facilitating the program, and its funder. (3) Categorize the program initiatives based on their level of prevention – primary (prevention, raising awareness), secondary (intervention) or tertiary (rehabilitation, exit strategies).

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.272 · 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