MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210950343

MYTHS OF CRIME

2010· article· en· W3210950343 on OpenAlexaff
Annette Nierobisz

Bibliographic record

VenueTRAILS: Teaching Resources and Innovations Library for Sociology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask (project management)MonsterNewspaperPoint (geometry)Computer scienceLawPolitical scienceHistoryEngineeringMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Assignment 1: In this assignment your task is to verify the claims made in one of the attached newspaper articles. After deciding which article you will analyze, your task is to locate evidence from academic research that assesses whether the claims made are true. You will summarize your findings in a 5-7 page paper (double-spaced with a 12-point font). This paper should be written in the style of a letter to the editor in which you respond to the arguments made by Rushford or Young. Assignment 2: Assignment 2 will help you recognize when sensationalist claims about crime are being made. Your specific task in Assignment 2, then, is to apply the theoretical framework outlined by Joel Best in Random Violence to Shakur’s case study in Monster. You will present your analysis in a paper that is approximately 5 pages in length

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTRAILS: Teaching Resources and Innovations Library for SociologySame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207