Social and psychological aspects of criminal juvenile justice in the world practice (Anglo-Saxon model of juvenile justice)
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
The article is the final part of the review of existing foreign models of juvenile criminal justice system. We analyze the principles of juvenile justice in the criminal trial: protective orientation, personalization and social richness of the trial, the emphasis on educational influences. We present the foreign experience of incorporating social, psychological and clinical special knowledge into specialized justice concerning juvenile offenders. We analyze modern trends in the development of juvenile justice in the United States and Canada. We present material related to methods of risk assessment of re-offending among adolescents. We highlight approaches to complex long-term follow-up of juvenile offenders in Anglo-Saxon juvenile justice. We describe some aspects of the probation service using the method of case management. In the context of the accepted “National Strategy for Action for the Benefit of Children for 2012-2017”, the prospects for the development of specialized criminal justice for young offenders in the Russian Federation are discussed
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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