MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392986160 · doi:10.32920/25443976

The Politics of Fear

2024· preprint· en· W4392986160 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. D. Martin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGun Ownership and Violence Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsPsychologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the aftermath of the school shootings in Newtown, Connecticut this past December, we experienced the world around us as less safe—understandably so. In response to such a tragic event, there is a degree of fear instilled in all of us that for many was at its peak in the New Year as we prepared to send our children back to school. The fear we experienced can be considered as both a cause and an effect. It is an effect in that it is an emotion brought about by a perceived threat; it is a cause in that reactions can be ascribed to it. School Boards across the United States and Canada reacted to the threat to school safety by investing in increased security strategies such as surveillance cameras, on-site police officers and security guards, enhanced lockdown procedures (all school entrances and classroom doors are locked at all times), and regular lockdown drills much like the fire drill practices with which we are all familiar. In Ontario, Canada for example, where I practiced for many years as a school-based child and youth care worker, the provincial government reacted by declaring that 10 million dollars would be immediately allocated to implement a “locked door” policy to enhance school security measures. All this is intended to protect our children from threat or harm and to create a safe environment in which children can play and learn.

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)0.006
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.073
Scholarly communication0.0170.010
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.349 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGun Ownership and Violence ResearchFrench-language works237,207