MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7079573252 · doi:10.26108/6pcy-qn45

Kids, crime, and coercion: child labour and exploitation in Nova Scotia's illegal economy

2007· article· en· W7079573252 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAcadiaU-DEV · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaChild labourOrganised crimeSubject (documents)BourgeoisieWork (physics)Face (sociological concept)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis is a preliminary study to demonstrate that some children in Nova Scotia are exploited by adults in illegal, underground markets in Nova Scotia. Children and youth are exploited in these underground economies in a manner similar to child labour in the formal sector. This use of children under the age of 19 in illegal trades in Canada has not been documented. This thesis has two main purposes. First, it provides a critical analysis of theories of child labour, the bourgeois child, and exploitation, to explain the child labour situation as it relates to illegal Canadian markets. Literature on the precise subject is scarce and this thesis uses a variety of sources on child labour generally and youth crime from Canada and abroad that helps to develop understanding of this social problem. Second, this thesis provides the results of a preliminary investigation into the problem of child labour in illegal, underground markets in Nova Scotia through an analysis of six interviews with experts in the field of youth crime, including three local police officers, a police expert on organized crime in Winnipeg, one social worker from Halifax, and a former member of the sex trade. Findings revealed that children are particularly vulnerable to exploitation, especially those in marginal situations. Juvenile prostitution, underage stripping, theft, and drug trafficking are the most common forms of illegal child labour in the province. Participants for this study revealed that this is a problem that requires further consideration. This is a topic that has received little attention, and additional research is needed so that an effective initiative may be undertaken to combat this form of exploitation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcadiaU-DEVSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207