An Environmental Scan of Best Practices in Supporting Persistent Youth Offenders in the Transition to Adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to understand how persistent youth offenders in Alberta can be best supported as they transition into adulthood. In addition, this report intended to name best and promising practices in North America and internationally by considering programs and services that address the risk factors and needs that a persistent youth offender faces during the transition age. The objectives of this project were to: (1) Establish an understanding of the risk factors present among persistent youth offenders as they transition to adulthood; (2) Establish an understanding of the needs of persistent youth offenders as they transition to adulthood; and (3) Determine best practice in supporting persistent youth offenders as they transition to adulthood. In order to address these objectives, two research methodologies were employed. First, a literature review was conducted to establish the risk factors present among persistent youth offenders in their transition to adulthood, as well as their specific needs during this time. Second, an environmental scan was conducted in North America and internationally to identify best and promising practices that support persistent, transition-aged youth offenders as they progress into adulthood.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".