An In-Depth Examination of School Investment and Extracurriular Activities by a Youth Offender Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The findings from the first year of a study called “A Profile of Youth Offenders in Calgary: An Interim Report” conducted by CRILF in 2007 and released in 2008, examined youth offending trends in Calgary for 2006, compared the criminal histories of 42 Serious Habitual Offenders (SHOs) to a matched sample of 42 non-SHOs, and closely examined the profiles of 123 youth who had various levels of contact with the youth justice system. The results generated a number of further questions regarding school investment and leisure activities. Specifically, the objectives of this study are to: (1) Elaborate on why youth who are more seriously involved with the youth justice system demonstrate less investment in school than others. (2) Elaborate on why youth who are more seriously involved in the youth justice system are less likely to participate in family and extracurricular leisure activities than youth less involved with the justice system.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".