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
Everybody is an expert on pain, by virtue of biological preparedness and personal experience. Unfortunately, this expertise fails large numbers of people, and we must improve our understanding through theoretical and research advances. A vast research-based literature on the nature and management of pain is now available, and there have been dramatic advances in our understanding and management of pain. Nevertheless, there continue to be major problems in the management of severe acute pain and chronic pain. It is argued that a formulation of pain that explicitly focuses upon social factors would more readily address human needs than models that focus upon biophysical and/or psychological factors alone (intrapersonal processes). Although ancient protective biological systems provide for escape and avoidance of pain, evolution of human capacities for cognitive processing and social adaptation necessitate a model of pain incorporating these capabilities (interpersonal processes). The more inclusive and comprehensive social communication model of pain is described and illustrated.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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