MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416827782 · doi:10.5539/res.v17n2p10

Wider Computer-Test Use to Assess-Risk-Manage (ARM) Cuts U.S. Yearly 10,000-Violence-Deaths &Saves $322B-$1.2T-Violence-Cost-by Diverting High-Risk-Persons

2025· article· W4416827782 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert John Zagar, Steve Varela, Joseph K. Kovach, Kenneth G. Busch, Lorraine Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGun Ownership and Violence Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorthwestern UniversityLaura and John Arnold FoundationUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignNorthern Illinois UniversityExelon CorporationU.S. Department of Homeland Security
KeywordsAttendanceActivity-based costingLiabilityRevenuePersonality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary.—Ask Standard Predictor (AS) and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2/A) computer-tests find high-risk persons with 3-or-4 out of a “7-point-high-risk-profile”(addiction-alcoholism, deception, depression, antisocial-behavior, paranoid-ideation, schizophrenic-thinking, violence), based on 320,051-persons, 212-studies, 95-years, with 97% objectivity, reliability, sensitivity, specificity, validity, compared to current ways that miss 61% (homicidal, mass or serial-murdering, sex-offending, overdosing, suicide-completers), costing U.S. $2.36T/year. One solution is teaching insurance executives to copy in 100 cities, “1-summer-Chicago-youth-job-program” 311,599 high-risk youth, over 17-years, targeted with ASP-replicated-equation, diverted with jobs, mentors, anger-training [ROI = $6.42/$], saving $3.6B-$5.3B, preventing 1,242 homicides, lowering shootings 46%, violent offenses 77%. Another solution is weekend, business-university-department workshops on the math and science with 124 real-life-stories of finding-high-risk-persons and taking the 2 computer tests for leadership (education, energy, health, military, nonprofit-religious, police, prisons, transportation, ROI = $2-323/$) lowering high-risk, saving hundreds of billions. Insurance-brokers mandating workshop attendance in professional liability contracts lower victim payouts, lost profits, and trauma.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.681
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicGun Ownership and Violence ResearchFrench-language works237,207