MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7043299923

(Se) soigner sous la contrainte : regards comparatifs sur les soins pénalement ordonnés (France, Canada, Suisse, Belgique) Care under constraint - comparative approaches to prison care - France, Canada, Switzerland and Belgium

2017· other· fr· W7043299923 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenEdition (OpenEdition) · 2017
Typeother
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstraint (computer-aided design)PrisonWork (physics)PopulationMultidisciplinary approach
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Si deux lois de 1953 et 1954 ont textuellement introduit les premiers soins pénalement ordonnés à l’encontre des toxicomanes puis des alcooliques dangereux pour autrui, ceux-ci sont en pratique apparus après la consécration du sursis avec mise à l’épreuve et de l’obligation de soin au terme de la décennie. Le législateur ajouta l’injonction thérapeutique en 1970, alors réservée aux toxicomanes, puis l’injonction de soin en 1998, initialement destinée aux seuls délinquants sexuels. Depuis lors, les réformes se sont succédé à échéances régulières pour étendre le champ d’application de ces prises en charge psychiatriques et psychologiques en milieu ouvert. Ce colloque international et interdisciplinaire vise à dresser un état des lieux et des savoirs au sujet des principaux enjeux soulevés par ces mesures de sûreté.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.013
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueOpenEdition (OpenEdition)→Same topicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis→French-language works237,207→