MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410524836 · doi:10.1080/13218719.2025.2486077

Cartage killers: considering highway serial homicide as a novel offender typology

2025· article· en· W4410524836 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Arntfield, David Williams

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatry Psychology and Law · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCrime and Detective Fiction Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTypologyHomicideCriminologyForensic engineeringPsychologyOffender profilingEngineeringPoison controlHistorySuicide preventionMedical emergencyMedicineArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With vocation-specific serial offenders being a relatively understudied phenomenon, the increased (and overdue) scrutiny of the intersectionality between the US long-haul trucking industry through initiatives such as the FBI’s now well-publicised Highway Serial Killer Initiative (HSKI), along with associated mainstream media reportage regarding this same phenomenon in the context of specific cases, raises questions about the motivational models of such offenders, their common psychological characteristics, and how to consistently define them. By way of comparison, healthcare serial killers have long been recognised in the literature and among both law enforcement and regulatory bodies as a distinct subtype of serial offender and there are correspondingly an array of specific investigative methodologies and failsafes now used to investigate and ameliorate their associated crimes. In this article, we seek to designate ‘cartage killers’ (serial offenders variously employed in logistics and Interstate long-haul tractor-trailer trucking) as a similarly specific phylum of perpetrator and to also establish corresponding nomenclature through a synthesis of the existing multidisciplinary literature.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatry Psychology and LawSame topicCrime and Detective Fiction StudiesFrench-language works237,207