MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171207981 · doi:10.1177/00111287211014155

Expanding Mechanisms of Governance: Uncertainty and Risk in Police Decision-Making Strategies in the Pursuit of Specialized Peace Bonds

2021· article· en· W3171207981 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCrime & Delinquency · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityWestern University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCorporate governanceCriminologyPolitical scienceRisk assessmentPsychologyBondBusinessComputer securityComputer scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines police officers' decision-making practices through analyzing how they determine which offenders are candidates for an 810, or peace bond. This legal tool allows police officers to petition the courts for continued surveillance and conditions for offenders postrelease. Little, however, is offered in terms of assessment guidelines on how to make such determinations. As a result, police officers discretionary behaviors and additional legal factors play a key role in these determinations. Our findings advance the idea that "uncertainty" is the central object to be managed, and further complicate how risk is constructed and mobilized by suggesting that risk assessments result in over-precautionary practices.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.346 · 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