MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2918672854 · doi:10.4324/9781351201995-6

Canadian universities and sexual violence

2019· book-chapter· en· W2918672854 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Graham Towl, Tammi Walker

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Security, and Conflict
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual violenceCriminologyPsychologyPolitical scienceGender studiesSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter discusses the laws that are being developed and that will require all of Canada’s post-secondary institutions to develop standard policies and procedures to deal with sexual violence complaints and provides adequate support to victims, based on best practices. Canadian universities have faced a significant demographic shift since the early 1970s: by 2014 women made up 56% of university and college students compared with 44% of male graduates. The work that was undertaken by Canadian researchers focused mainly on the incidence, prevalence, correlates, and causes of male physical and psychological violence on married, cohabiting and separated/divorced women. Colleges and universities are also required to provide data and information to the Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills Development on the supports and mechanisms set in place that are related to sexual violence prevention and response. The most common way in which community and campus were formally engaged was through a sexual assault advisory committee.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0200.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same topicGender, Security, and ConflictFrench-language works237,207