MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171811670 · doi:10.7202/1076648ar

Le profilage racial à Montréal, effets des politiques et des pratiques organisationnelles

2020· article· fr· W3171811670 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Anne‐Marie Livingstone, Marie Meudec, Rhita Harim

Bibliographic record

VenueNouvelles pratiques sociales · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceEthnologySociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’article décrit les résultats d’une enquête qualitative sur le profilage racial présent dans les pratiques policières et vécu par des jeunes de minorités racisées à Montréal, Québec. Dans plus de la moitié des 48 entrevues réalisées, des jeunes ont partagé des expériences de profilage racial provenant de policiers. Les résultats obtenus révèlent que ce profilage racial n’est pas seulement (ou même principalement) le produit de préjugés de la part des policiers, mais qu’il est le résultat de certaines politiques organisationnelles des services de police.

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)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0170.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNouvelles pratiques socialesSame topicPolicing Practices and PerceptionsFrench-language works237,207