MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4376135795 · doi:10.18192/jpp.v32i1.6754

Profiling and the Canadian Carceral State | Les profilages et l’État carcérale canadien

2023· article· fr· W4376135795 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Justin Piché

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Prisoners on Prisons · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfiling (computer programming)Political scienceCriminologyState (computer science)Computer securityLawComputer scienceSociologyOperating systemAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Carceral State routinely engages in profi ling of people pushed to the margins by colonialism, racism and white supremacy, capitalism and classism, patriarchy and heteronormativity, ableism, and other violent structures.This is evident in who is targeted, harmed, and killed by policing, imprisonment, immigration, child apprehension, health, social services and assistance, and other carceral institutions.The Journal of Prisoners on Prisons invites contributions by current and former prisoners, their loved ones, and grassroots community organizations that document, critique, and propose alternatives to profi ling evident in carceral practices and experiences.Prospective contributors can also submit pieces examining resistance eff orts behind and beyond bars to build decarceral futures.Les profi lages des personnes marginalisées par le colonialisme, le racisme et la suprématie blanche, le capitalisme et le classisme, le patriarcat et l'hétéronormativité, le capacitisme et d'autres structures violentes est une pratique récurrente chez l'État carcéral canadien.Cela est évident lorsqu'on observe qui est ciblé, blessé et tué par les services de police, l'emprisonnement, l'immigration, l'appréhension d'enfants, de santé, ainsi

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score0.701

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0270.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Prisoners on Prisons→Same topicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis→French-language works237,207→