MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415565849 · doi:10.1111/plar.70028

Principled Experiments in Just Being: From Police Oversight to Community Intersight

2025· article· en· W4415565849 on OpenAlexaff
Beatrice Jauregui

Bibliographic record

VenuePoLAR Political and Legal Anthropology Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPraxisCommunity policingGovernment (linguistics)Corporate governanceSovereigntyAction (physics)Criminal justiceCommons

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This article compares ideals and practices of police oversight in two very different contexts—settler colonial North America and “post” colonial South Asia—to interrogate fundamental principles underlying police oversight globally and to imagine new ways of working toward transformation. The analysis ultimately asks: how might we conceive new modes of engagement around community safety and governance in line with ideals of social justice as a global humanistic principle? Drawing inspiration from (1) a Gandhian ethics of “fidelity to being” and “unconditional equality” in Satyagraha praxis as a “religion of resistance” to sovereign command and (2) Haudenosaunee principles manifest in the Kayaneren'kó:wa (Great Law of Peace), I suggest we move away from demanding more or better police oversight bodies and turn instead toward creating institutions that foster “intersight” as spaces of exchange among community members, government officials, legal experts, and other stakeholders. Intersight may provide good‐faith forums for critical self‐introspection by all parties involved and, crucially, open‐minded and compassionate listening to others regarding what kinds of policing or other forms of collective action geared toward security, safety, and justice, may be needed in a particular community.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.376 · 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 venuePoLAR Political and Legal Anthropology ReviewSame topicPolicing Practices and PerceptionsFrench-language works237,207