MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965704547 · doi:10.1089/109493101753376641

Pornography in Usenet: A Study of 9,800 Randomly Selected Images

2001· article· en· W1965704547 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

VenueCyberPsychology & Behavior · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPornographyStatuteSample (material)The InternetHistoryPsychologyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebPolitical scienceLawPsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper builds on an earlier study by Mehta and Plaza, from 1997, by analyzing 9,800 randomly selected images taken from 32 Usenet newsgroups between July 1995 and July 1996. The study concludes that an increasing percentage of pornographic images in Usenet come from commercially oriented sources and that commercial sources are more likely to post explicit images. Pornographic images containing themes that fall under most obscenity statutes are more likely to be posted by noncommercial sources. By examining the themes most commonly found in the sample, it is concluded that the vast majority of images contain legally permissible content. Only a small fraction of images contain pedophilic, bestiality, co-prophilic/urophilic, amputation and mutilation, and necrophilic themes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.332 · 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