Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cause of schizophrenia, a serious mental illness characterized by hallucinations, delusions and a marked deterioration in social functioning, is an enigma that continues to perplex the scientific community. While we know that approximately 80% of the risk of developing schizophrenia is conferred by genes (1), no research group has yet located a gene(s) contributing to the cause of schizophrenia. Moreover, while a significant environmental contribution is indicated by the fact that one‐half of monozygotic twins pairs are discordant for schizophrenia, the nature of this environmental contribution is still controversial. The past theory that an abnormal family upbringing was the causative environmental factor has not stood up to scientific scrutiny. In recent years, the search for causative environmental factors has focused on the possibility that some type of prenatal insult predisposes the fetus to develop schizophrenia in early adult life. The initial suspicion of an intrauterine insult was based on indirect evidence. First, dermatoglyphic patterns in patients with schizophrenia were noted to be abnormal. The dermal ridges are laid down between the third and fifth month of gestation, in effect leaving a fossilized record of neurodevelopmental perturbation. Second, minor physical anomalies, typically involving the mouth, ears and eyes, occur with increased frequency in schizophrenia. Much like dermatoglyphic abnormalities, minor physical anomalies represent a disruption of the final phase of the developmental shaping of the face, which takes place in the second trimester. Of course, both abnormal dermatoglyphic patterns and minor physical anomalies may reflect the effects of abnormal genetic regulation of development rather than an extrinsic insult.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".