Bibliographic record
Abstract
Corrections in Canada are divided into two separate systems: the federal correctional system and the provincial/territorial correctional systems as outlined by the Criminal Code of Canada. Adults (age 18 and older) who are sentenced to custodial terms of two years or greater are under the responsibility of the federal system. Correctional Services Canada administers federal sentences, including any community supervision. For adults in the federal system, community supervision is almost always a part of their sentence. These individuals may be granted parole by the Parole Board of Canada after having served one-third of their custodial sentence or, on Statutory Release; a presumptive release after serving two-thirds of their custodial sentence. For adults who are sentenced to custodial terms of less than two years, periods of probation, and other types of sentences, the correctional systems of the province or territory are responsible for administering these sentences. The provinces and territories are also responsible for all justice-involved youth (aged 13–17), governed by Youth Criminal Justice Act, a federal statue. Adults involved in provincial and territorial corrections are governed by the Criminal Code of Canada and the Prisons and Reformatory Act. Community supervision in Canada, regardless of whether it is federal, provincial, or territorial, is more similar than different, with the greatest differences noted between the federal system and the provincial/territorial systems. Virtually all of Canada&s;s correctional system have been influenced by the Risk-Need-Responsivity model, routinely use risk-needs assessments and community supervision focusses on addressing criminogenic needs and typically employ community agencies to provide treatment and other rehabilitative services. The special case of “change agent” community corrections in British Columbia, one Canadian province, is described as it has successfully implemented and integrated a variety of evidence-based practices.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.005 |
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".