MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310613961 · doi:10.52907/slj.v6i1.157

Comparative Criminology and Criminal Justice within the African Continent

2022· article· en· W4310613961 on OpenAlexaff
John Winterdyk

Bibliographic record

VenueStrathmore Law Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Illicit Activities, and Governance
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminal justiceCriminologyEconomic JusticePolitical scienceGreen criminologyTheory of criminal justiceComparative researchSociologyLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is no corner of the world where crime cannot be found. Increasingly, conventional crimes are being compounded by transnational crimes which know no borders. Concern for public safety and security nationally, regionally, and internationally have increasingly becoming an international issue and concern. This has been reflected in the 16th of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (i.e., Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions). There is an ever-increasing need for comparative criminology and criminal justice research in a world where communication, travel, and international cooperation and collaboration are becoming increasingly common. While many criminology and criminal justice programs offer related programs and courses, the practice of comparative criminological or criminal justice research on the African continent is less well developed. This article draws on existing research and practices to explore the rationale and justification for engaging in such research and offers several methodological approaches that can be used to promote comparative criminological and criminal justice inquiry and research within the African continent.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0130.026
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.335
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrathmore Law JournalSame topicCrime, Illicit Activities, and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207