MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2966343911

Youth and the Law: New Approaches to Criminal Justice and Child Protection

2015· article· en· W2966343911 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Susan Reid, Rebecca Jaremko Bromwich, Sarah Gilliss

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCLARITYCriminal justiceLaw enforcementEconomic JusticeCriminologyPolitical sciencePublishingLawCriminal lawSociologyPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emond Publishing is pleased to announce that the third edition of one of our bestselling texts Youth and the Law: New Approaches to Criminal Justice and Child Protection is now available. The author team's knowledge and experience as academic writers and university and college instructors brings clarity and depth to this important and often controversial subject. The third edition has been significantly updated to reflect current theories and models of youth justice, as well as new discussions on common offences, risk factors, and societal responses to youth in conflict with the law. The authors present the complete process of dealing with youth and crime, from police procedures to the trial and sentencing to rehabilitation. Youth and the Law also examines statistics, reports from the field, and studies of programs introduced under the Youth Criminal Justice Act to present a clear understanding of law enforcement as it relates to Canadian youth. The text also includes real-life case studies to keep students engaged, as well as chapter summaries, key terms and definitions, and review questions that serve as a useful study guide for students.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.025
Scholarly communication0.0130.014
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.242
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.052 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChild Abuse and Trauma→French-language works237,207→