MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3167036835 · doi:10.7202/1076654ar

L’Avis du Conseil interculturel de Montréal (CIM) sur la problématique du profilage racial à Montréal

2020· article· fr· W3167036835 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Guy Drudi

Bibliographic record

VenueNouvelles pratiques sociales · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Une des formes les plus virulentes de discrimination envers les membres des groupes minorisés est la pratique du profilage racial par des autorités policières (CPDJQ, 2011). Considéré au départ par les autorités policières comme pouvant faire partie des procédures d’investigation à l’endroit des prévenus, le profilage racial constitue une atteinte aux droits et à la dignité de la personne. L’article fait état des travaux du Conseil interculturel de Montréal sur cette problématique qui est toujours d’actualité en dépit des politiques municipales contre le racisme et la discrimination mises de l’avant par la Ville de Montréal et le Service de police de Montréal (CIM, 2017).

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)0.005
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.295 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNouvelles pratiques socialesSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207