MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7096455668

PROSTITUTION JOHN HOWARD SOCIETY OF ALBERTA 2001 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2014· article· en· W7096455668 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislatureHarassmentSocial issuesLegislationCriminal codeSexual abuseAffect (linguistics)AddictionExecutive summary
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prostitution is the exchange of sexual acts for payment. There are several factors that are associated with entry into the prostitution trade. Some of the more influential factors are age, early home leaving, childhood sexual abuse, drug abuse and a poor financial situation. Most prostitutes have encountered at least one of these problems, and many have experienced them in combination. The problems associated with street prostitution affect not only the prostitute, but also the community in which he or she works and the family members of the people using his or her services. Prostitutes often suffer physical and sexual abuse, drug addiction and low self esteem. Residential and commercial areas often experience traffic congestion, noise, litter, harassment of residents, declining property values and business loss. Families of those who procure the services of prostitutes can suffer financial hardship, distrust, emotional suffering and family breakdown. There are three legislative options that have emerged to address the problems associated with prostitution. The first option, further criminalization, proposes to strengthen prostitution related laws. The second option, decriminalization, proposes to remove prostitution related offences from the Criminal Code and replace them with municipal bylaws. The final option, legalization, maintains that prostitution is a social problem that should be legalized and regulated by the state.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2180.093

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSex work and related issues→French-language works237,207→