MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3166053753 · doi:10.1192/bja.2020.84

A child psychiatrist's expert roles in the criminal court: children as vulnerable witnesses

2021· article· en· W3166053753 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBJPsych Advances · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDeception detection and forensic psychology
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWitnessCompetence (human resources)PsychologyExpert witnessCriminal courtChild custodyCriminologySocial psychologyLawPolitical scienceInternational law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY In this article three main issues are addressed using anecdotal and anonymised illustrations of situations in which the author has been engaged, during 35 years of medico-legal practice, to assist in the process of obtaining and analysing the evidence of children to facilitate decision-making by various authorities and tribunals. Those issues are: the competence of a child to be a witness in the Crown Court; the process by which a child's evidence has been elicited; and the use of an analytical approach to the content (verbal, behavioural and emotional) of a child's evidence as an aid to jurists who have the task of reaching a decision as to the child's reliability, as distinct from their competence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.329 · 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