MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398150292 · doi:10.23977/jaip.2024.070208

Research on Criminal Risks in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

2024· article· en· W4398150292 on OpenAlex
Yaxin Shen

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminal behaviourCriminologyPsychologyArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is an era of information that is moving towards digitalization, and the term "artificial intelligence" is no longer unfamiliar to contemporary young people. Robots are able to simulate human movements, this deep development of science and technology has undoubtedly profoundly changed our way of production and life. Artificial intelligence has gradually penetrated into the development of criminal law in China, bringing considerable risks and challenges to traditional criminal law and criminal proceedings. We are still in the era of weak artificial intelligence and will be in the era of weak artificial intelligence for a long time, and its "tool attribute" is undeniable. This paper is committed to analyzing the risks of the integration of artificial intelligence technology and traditional trial mode, the risks of the increase of artificial intelligence crimes and the criminal legal risks arising from the difficulty of criminal attribution, then puts forward several suggestions on the subject status, technical prevention , and legal regulation of weak artificial intelligence. The purpose is to foresee the risk as early as possible, let artificial intelligence better serve mankind, and make technology and law together to promote the process of China's rule of law.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.512
GPT teacher head0.582
Teacher spread0.070 · 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