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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevalence of reported domestic violence or intimate partner violence has greatly increased, with approximately 1.5 million women violently assaulted annually in the United States by an intimate partner. Strangulation is often seen in violence against women, including domestic violence cases. Strangulation is defined as "a form of asphyxia characterized by closure of the blood vessels or air passages of the neck as a result of external pressure on the neck." This is a 10-year case review of 102 living victims of strangulation who underwent medicolegal evaluation at the Clinical Forensic Medicine Program at a State Medical Examiner's Office serving Southern Indiana and all of Kentucky. The majority of victims (79%) were strangled by an intimate partner, and manual strangulation was the most common method (83%). A total of 38 victims (38%) described a history of domestic violence, and the same number lost consciousness while being strangled. Nine (9%) women were pregnant at the time of the attack, while 13 (13%) had a history of being sexually abused in addition to being strangled. A paucity of cases involved only strangulation, as most of the victims were subjected to myriad forms of blunt force trauma which included not only the head and neck but also other bodily regions. This is a unique presentation of strangulation of living persons as most evidence of strangulation in the forensic literature has been derived from postmortem examinations of the victims. This comprehensive study discussing the examination of a living strangulation victim offers valuable insight into the mechanism and the physical findings involved in the strangulation process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it