MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245192388 · doi:10.3138/cpp.36.suppl.s81

Research, Policy Development, and Progress: Antisocial Behaviour and the Automobile

2010· article· en· W4245192388 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Rick Linden, Robert E. Mann, Reginald G. Smart, Evelyn Vingilis, Robert Solomon, Erika Chamberlain, Mark Asbridge, Jürgen Rehm, Benedikt Fischer, Gina Stoduto, Piotr Wilk, Michael Roerecke, Cindy Trayling, David L. Wiesenthal

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoWestern UniversityCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellencePolitical sciencePublic relationsAggressionPoliticsCriminologyBusinessPsychologySocial psychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Justice policy is typically based more on political considerations than on research results. One way to break down barriers between researchers and policy-makers is to encourage partnerships. AUTO21, a member of the Networks of Centres of Excellence program, is designed to facilitate partnerships. The Antisocial Behaviour and the Automobile project focuses on auto theft, driving under the influence of alcohol and cannabis, and road rage/driver aggression. The research areas that have had the greatest policy impact benefited from strong partnerships with organizations that have the visibility, authority, and resources to implement significant changes in program funding and social policy. These areas also have an extensive body of prior research.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0080.013
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public PolicySame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207