The Extent of Youth Victimization, Crime and Delinquency in Alberta, 1999: Summary of Calgary Findings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1999, the Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family (CRILF), in partnership with researchers from the University of Alberta, undertook a project to examine the extent of youth victimization, crime and delinquency in Alberta. The project was designed to provide information on the prevalence of victimization and delinquent behaviours among youth using an in-school written survey of students in grades 7 through 12. In addition, the study also examined other characteristics such as demographics and family, peer group and school factors that might be related to victimization and delinquency. Detailed findings from the Alberta-wide project are presented in a companion report. The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of the victimization and delinquency data collected from the students in Calgary. A secondary purpose of this report is to examine changes in the level of youth victimization and delinquency in Calgary over the past five years. In 1994, CRILF conducted a similar study for the Calgary Police Service with funding from the Solicitor General Canada. By comparing the results from the present study with those collected previously, it is possible to address the issue of changes in victimization and delinquency during this period.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".