MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965899219 · doi:10.1348/1355325041719338

Seeing things differently: The viewing time alternative to penile plethysmography

2004· article· en· W1965899219 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLegal and Criminological Psychology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia Influence and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnavailabilityComputer scienceUsabilitySet (abstract data type)Stimulus (psychology)AccidentalVirtual realityHuman–computer interactionPsychologyCognitive psychologyEngineeringAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the use of viewing time (VT), how long a subject looks at a probable sexual stimulus, as an alternative to penile plethysmography (PPG). We then trace the history of VT to assess sexual interest from 1942 to the present. The first computer‐generated stimulus set for PPG was developed by Canadian researchers. This set was tested using VT by the second author and found valid. The unavailability of the set for further use resulted in the authors developing a new, computermodified set with an alternate form version. This required the modification and compositing of images of real people. The proposed research using this set is described. To avoid using real photographic imagery in the future we propose use of specialized computer software that permits development of images from scratch. VT is a limited technology and we close with descriptions of new ways to assess sexual interest and behaviour using virtual reality and virtual environments.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.848
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.223 · 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