Bibliographic record
Abstract
La categorie de gang de rue construit depuis les trente dernieres annees au Quebec l’image d’une jeunesse presentee comme nouvelle classe dangereuse, issue des classes populaires et des minorites racisees. Emergeant d’abord au sein du champ mediatique a la fin des annees 1980, la categorie a ete l’objet d’une importante production criminologique dans la seconde moitie des annees 1990, legitimant une reorientation des politiques publiques montrealaises du traitement penal de la jeunesse. Inspires par une perspective genealogique, nous decrirons d’abord l’emergence d’une preoccupation mediatique pour les gangs de rue, revelant la maniere dont, sur fond de racisme anti-Noir, un consensus a progressivement emerge autour de la necessite d’agir sur un phenomene dont l’existence meme etait pourtant initialement contestee. Nous reviendrons ensuite sur l’investissement expertal de la categorie, mettant en evidence la maniere dont son efficacite symbolique a stimule la production d’un ensemble de travaux criminologiques qui ont contribue a en etendre l’usage sans pour autant lever son flou constitutif. Nous montrerons enfin comment, legitimant la diffusion d’une logique mondialisee de gestion des risques, la categorie s’est imposee jusqu’au cœur des jeux relationnels qui structurent les pratiques quotidiennes de suivi des jeunes delinquants montrealais.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".