MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3103894387

Does punishing the guilty mean punishing their families? A Canadian perspective

2018· article· en· W3103894387 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Frédéric Mégret

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de la Justice · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPunishment (psychology)SentenceCriminologyCriminal justicePerspective (graphical)PrisonConvictRationalityAffect (linguistics)PhenomenonInvisibilitySociologyPsychologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceLawEpistemologyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prison sentence often affects the convict’s family circle? Non-issue or real question? Frederic Megret informs us on the theoretical works that could explain this phenomenon. The invisibility of families questions the criminal rationality: if we affect, do we punish? Families can be seen as an active component of crime, as a passive victim of punishment or as a vehicle for their punishment. The fact of considering the impact of the sentence on families could form the basis of a potential reform, particularly when sentencing, or implementing the execution of the sentence. Families could represent the missing piece of this complex puzzle, a hyphen to better understand how the individual and the social are intertwined. The issue of the convicts’ families is an open invitation to rethink the criminal justice systems.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score0.888

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0370.030
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de la JusticeSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207