MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123088143

Legal Conceptions of Harm Related to Sexual Images Online in the United States and Canada

2015· article· en· W3123088143 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrea Slane

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmPossession (linguistics)Child pornographyPornographySexual abuseSubject (documents)Order (exchange)CriminologyPsychologyPolitical scienceChild sexual abuseThe InternetLawSuicide preventionPoison controlMedicineBusinessComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the history of legal discussion of the harms of child pornography possession and viewing in the United States and Canada, with special attention to the evolving conception of direct harms to children and youth pictured in these images. The article further addresses ongoing uncertainty about harms associated with images that do not record an instance of sexual abuse, but where the harm arises solely from non-consensual distribution of nude and/or sexual images. Achieving greater understanding and recognition of both the similarities and differences between the harms that arise from the “permanent record of abuse” and from ongoing circulation and use of images beyond the subject’s control are necessary in order to equip both clinical and legal practitioners with the knowledge they need in order to provide appropriate support for victims of the varied forms of sexual abuse related to sexual image online.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0340.043
Scholarly communication0.0120.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207