MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7065723774

The Effects of Regulated Discretion on Police Referrals to\nRestorative Justice

2013· article· en· W7065723774 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle Detector Development and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaDiscretionRestorative justiceEconomic JusticeLegislationContext (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Nova Scotia Restorative Justice Program relies heavily on referrals from police who are authorized to refer a range of property and both violent and non-violent offences. Federal legislation and provincialprotocols guide referral decisions. Both are designed to ensure that police consider extra-judicial measures, including restorative justice. This article reports the findings ofa surveyof police officers on their views of restorative justice and the types of cases they consider appropriate for a referral. The findings confirm what other researchers have found about the types of cases police officers prefer to divert from mainstream criminal justice responses. Placed in the context of the Nova Scotia Restorative Justice Program, the current survey findings shed light on how efforts to structure discretion and decision-making will have limited effect.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicParticle Detector Development and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207