MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415158491 · doi:10.54119/alr.cwie7453

Crying Wolves, Paper Tigers, and Busy Beavers—Oh My!: A New Approach to Pro Se Prisoner Litigation

2022· article· en· W4415158491 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Justin Van Orsdol

Bibliographic record

VenueArkansas law review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrison populationPrisonPer capitaPopulationCrying

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To say that the United States is infatuated with incarceration would be a gross understatement. As a result of “tough on-crime” laws, the United States has “the largest prison population in the world, with more than 2.3 million persons behind bars on any given day” and it “also has the world’s highest per capita rate of incarceration” with a rate that is “five to ten times higher than those of other industrialized democracies like England and Wales . . . . Canada . . . , and Sweden.” Due in part to prison population increases, the conditions of U.S. prisons are atrocious. Prisons are often overcrowded, “which in turn leads to an increase in violence, neglect, and gross mistreatment.”

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArkansas law reviewSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207