MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411624561 · doi:10.1177/0032258x251347362

Chicago’s bureau of detectives’ area technology centers – An exploratory case study of hidden values

2025· article· en· W4411624561 on OpenAlex
Kenneth N. McKay, Monika Mikhail

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Police Journal Theory Practice and Principles · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPersonal Information Management and User Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploratory researchLibrary scienceSociologyEngineeringSocial scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An exploratory case study was conducted on the Area Technology Centers (ATCs) in the Chicago Police Department. We investigated direct and indirect impacts of the organizational transformation on the homicide investigations. The analysis suggests that the ATCs might have had a role in improving the homicide investigation outcomes, and detective productivity. However, it is difficult to state categorically that the ATCs resulted in a systemic improvement on whether or not a case was actually solved or not. The study provides insights into how organizational transformation effects can be considered in the analysis data in such situations.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.459
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.271
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.206 · 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