MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404024953 · doi:10.22215/cujs.v3i1.4931

Detecting Probation and Parole Officer Adherence to the Made-in-Ontario CCP Model of Community Supervision

2024· article· en· W4404024953 on OpenAlexaffabout
Saoirse Kealey, Ellen Coady, Shelley L. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueCarleton undergraduate journal of science. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOfficerCriminologyPsychologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study aims to assess probation and parole officers' (PPOs) adherence to the Made-in-Ontario Core Correctional Practice (CCP) model of community supervision with justice-impacted people. Case notes from 5 PPOs (for 45 clients) were coded to examine if evidence of CCP strategies used during PPO and client interactions could be reliably detected in PPO case notes. Preliminary findings indicate promising evidence for the detection of CCP strategies within case notes. Inter-rater reliability was also found to be high. Future considerations include expanding the study to a larger sample, refining the coding manual, and examining potential covariates. These insights contribute to understanding the integration and effectiveness of CCP practices into community supervision settings.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCarleton undergraduate journal of science.Same topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207