Online sexual crimes, offenders, and victims theory, research, and practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"Adopting a multidisciplinary perspective, this volume explores contemporary knowledge regarding the online sexual exploitation of children and adolescents, and challenges prevailing myths perpetuated by society and the media concerning this form of violence, the offenders, and their victims. Drawing on a wealth of data collected from real cases in Quebec, the book introduces readers to explanatory models of online offending and victimization, the criminal trajectories and characteristics of online offenses, the individual attributes of offenders and victims, issues pertaining to virtual identities and anonymity preservation techniques, and considerations for prevention and intervention practices. Online Sexual Crimes, Offenders, and Victims will be of interest to students, researchers and professionals in the fields of criminal justice and public health, including criminologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, psychotherapists, social workers, police investigators, probation officers, magistrates, and lawyers"-- Provided by publisher
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 | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".