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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the link between victims and offenders and how these roles are often interchangeable when it comes to a youth’s involvement in crime. Usually, this connection is disregarded because of the focus on the immediate situation and not the youth’s experiences with both roles. Because of this strong association between offenders and victims, the focus of this paper is about what stops a victim from becoming an offender and vice versa. The aspects focused on are individual and social factors, as well as the interactions and overlap between these factors. Generally, it was found that the criminal justice system and social service supports tend to only focus on individual factors while ignoring the social environmental aspects. This paper demonstrates the importance of not only acknowledging a youth's role as both an offender and victim, but also the importance of addressing all aspects around how and why they got involved in criminal activity. By understanding the significance of these factors, this information can be used and integrated into the criminal justice system to help youth reduce their involvement in crime or to provide supports that address the cycle of victimization and offending.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it