Youth custody and community services in Canada, 2005/2006
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
admitted to sentenced custody, 14 % fewer than the previous year and 18 % fewer than in 2003/2004, the fi scal year in which the YCJA was implemented. Declines occurred in both secure and open custody admissions. There were 13,681 youth admitted to remand (meaning custody while awaiting trial or sentencing) which was an increase of 2 % from the previous year. There were 12,550 admissions to probation in 2005/2006, marking a 2 % decline from the previous year and a 24% decrease since the implementation of the YCJA in 2003/2004. Probation continued to account for 37 % of all admissions to youth correctional services programs. Compared to years prior to the implementation of the YCJA, 16- to 17-year-olds accounted for a larger proportion of youth admitted to sentenced custody. They accounted for 69 % of youth admitted to sentenced custody in 2005/2006, compared to 53 % in 2001/2002, the earliest comparable trend year prior to the implementation of the YCJA. The largest rise in their representation occurred in 2003/2004, the fi rst year of the YCJA. The proportion of youth admitted to sentenced custody for property offences decreased in 2005/2006, and no longer account for the largest proportion of admissions to sentenced custody. According to data from 6 jurisdictions, 26 % of admissions to sentenced custody in 2005/2006 were for property offences, compared to 36 % in 2001/2002. This change is largely a result of considerable decreases in the number of admissions to sentenced custody for property offences.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it