MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A State of Blessed Inspiration

2002· article· en· W2035749446 on OpenAlexaffabout
Royd. King

Bibliographic record

VenueMental Retardation · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsLakehead Psychiatric Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsState (computer science)PsychologySociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I was recently asked to inspire members of an audience who support individuals with developmental disabilities and mental health concerns. Jean Vanier (1998), the Canadian founder of the worldwide L’Arche movement, in his most recent book, Becoming Human, wrote of his belief that we are blessed to walk alongside the lives of individuals with developmental disabilities. It was a true privilege to tell my audience about some of the people I have met in my work as a psychiatrist who have graced my life and inspired me. I told the audience that several weeks prior to my presentation, I had met a man while holding a psychiatric clinic in a town far from my hometown and my children. He was from a smaller town farther still from where either he or I were born. With scientific rigor, I had gathered in advance years of his documented testing and re-testing. This documentation told a story of this man’s life, colored by chronic, intermittent aggression, noncompliance, a moderate degree of developmental disability, and a seizure disorder. As he walked into the assessment room, I felt at ease quickly as I watched his smile and felt the warmth and strength of his handshake. I was quickly inspired as he granted me the privilege of beginning to trust me, to the extent that in the first 15 minutes of our discussion, he explained:

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.033
Scholarly communication0.0210.020
Open science0.0030.015
Research integrity0.0110.035
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.007

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMental RetardationSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207