MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7108220550 · doi:10.1080/07418825.2025.2594189

Criminal Investigative Failures: A Network Analysis

2025· article· en· W7108220550 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJustice Quarterly · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Institute of Justice
KeywordsNetwork analysisCrime analysisSocial network analysisIntelligence analysisCriminal investigation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The police investigative function is a key component of the criminal justice system. Wrongful convictions and investigative failures can cause significant and long-lasting damage at all levels of society. These failures are typically the product of multiple interconnected factors, which can be generally grouped into structural, organizational, and personal categories. Using network analysis, we explore the relationships between the causal factors associated with investigative failures in 50 murder and rape cases, most of them wrongful convictions. We identified 40 different causal factor types. Some of these functioned as catalysts (initiators that cascaded into other causal factors), some as brokers (bridges between factors), and others as products (the end result of the causal factor chain). Understanding the architecture of the network – its components and relationships – provides a means for mitigating the risk of criminal investigative failures.

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.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.563
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.337 · 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