MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240637378 · doi:10.3138/cjccj.48.3.423

Neither Safe Nor Sound? The Perils and Possibilities of Risk

2006· article· en· W4240637378 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lucia Zedner

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDerogationCivil libertiesLicenseLaw and economicsPoliticsHuman rightsRisk managementSet (abstract data type)Risk analysis (engineering)Risk assessmentPolitical scienceLawBusinessActuarial scienceSociologyComputer securityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rise of risk as a basis for public policy has profound implications for civil liberties. Where risk prevails over adherence to rules in public policy making, it has the potential to undermine both human rights and basic legal values. The fact that threats to security license derogation from basic rights requires careful attention to the limits to scientific measurement of human risks. Distinguishing between the assessment and the management of risk offers only a partial solution to the danger that political considerations inform and distort risk measurement. Examining how adjacent social scientific disciplines conceive, deploy, and respond to risk and uncertainty reveals a powerful, if problematic, set of analytical resources with which criminology might profitably engage.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.136
Scholarly communication0.0240.035
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0090.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations36
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénaleSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207