MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098721508

This article has been peer reviewed.

2015· article· en· W7098721508 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicHistory and Theory of Mathematics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental illnessCoronerMedical examinerCause of deathSuicide preventionDiseasePoison control
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: People in custody are more likely to die prematurely, especially of vi-olent causes, than similar people not in custody. Some of these deaths may be preventable. In this study we examined causes of death (violent and natural) among people in custody in Ontario. We also compared the causes of deaths in 3 custodial systems (federal penitentiaries, provincial prisons and police cells). Methods: We examined all available files of coroners ’ inquests into the deaths of people in custody in federal penitentiaries, provincial prisons and police cells in Ontario from 1990 to 1999. Data collected included age, cause of death, place of death, history of psychiatric illness and history of substance abuse. Causes of death were categorized as violent (accidental poisoning, suicide or homicide) or natural (cancer, cardiovascular disease or “other”). Crude death rates were esti-mated for male inmate populations in federal and provincial institutions. There were inadequate numbers for women and inadequate denominator estimates for police cells.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.764

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4640.315

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.149 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHistory and Theory of MathematicsFrench-language works237,207