The individual and contextual determinants of homicide and homicide clearance in Canada 1976-2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada has seen an uneven temporal and geographical decline in homicide rates since the mid 1970s. In addition, Canada has simultaneously seen a proportionate increase in unsolved homicides. These two trends at first appear incongruent; however, there are a multitude of factors which influence both homicide rate fluctuations and declining clearance rates. This dissertation examines these two separate yet related phenomena in three manuscripts. In the first manuscript homicide clearance is examined at the case level in order to discern which event level features have the strongest affect on clearance outcomes. It compares the differential effects of geo-temporal influences, victim characteristics and offence details on clearance probabilities. Outcomes indicate that offence characteristics play a strong role in clearance probabilities; however, they do not completely explain the temporal decline and the geographical differences. The second manuscript examines homicide clearance rates at the regional level over three decades as a means to better understand how workload, offence and structural issues affect changing levels of homicide clearance. It also examines how certain features interact in their affect on clearance rates. Results indicate that workload factors influence homicide clearance rates, but that they interact with both structural factors and the proportion of young male victims. The final manuscript investigates regional level homicide rates over three decades with the purpose of determining the way in which changes in the size of the young male demographic influence interpersonal violence rate changes, as well as the way in which this segment of the population interacts with socio-economic factors in its influence on these rates. Results indicate that changing demographics have a strong influence on homicide rates, but that the young male segment also interacts with socio-economic influences. Overall, this dissertation adds to both homicide and homicide clearance literatures in Canada by examining multiple influences over time and space which have not previously been researched.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".