Bibliographic record
Abstract
When a panel of federal judges ruled in August 2009 that California must release a full one-quarter of its prisoners, it did more than insist that 40,000 people go free. It asserted that what was once a “correctional crisis,” marked by deadly overcrowding and monumental prison mismanagement, had become chronic. No longer a temporary phenomenon, the “critical condition” of the Golden State’s prisons was now the normal state of affairs. This book shows how the California Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA), the labor union representing prison officers and other correctional workers, had transformed from a loose, fraternal organization into one of the most politically potent and feared interest groups in the nation. The book describes how the union promoted ultratough policies like “Three Strikes and You’re Out,” empowered political figures and groups that supported its interests and views on criminal punishment, and frustrated efforts to privatize prisons. And as its leaders made strides for its members, the union also influenced the nature, purpose, and scope of imprisonment. So to understand California’s deep and durable penal crisis, The book explains, we cannot neglect the story of this group so often known simply as “the powerful prison guards’ union.” The book draws on years of intensive research as he uses the lessons of the CCPOA to explore how actors create, shape, and protect their preferred status quo and considers whether, by making these mechanisms clear, we might open the door to real and lasting change in the penal field and beyond.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.270 | 0.099 |
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".