Healthy Ageing – Adults with Intellectual Disabilities: Biobehavioural Issues
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
This report has been prepared by the Ageing Special Interest Research Group of the International Association for the Scientific Study of Intellectual Disabilities (IASSID) in collaboration with the Department of Mental Health and Substance Dependence and the Programme on Ageing and Health, World Health Organization (WHO), Geneva, Switzerland, and all rights are reserved by the above mentioned organization. The document may, however, be freely reviewed, abstracted, reproduced or translated in part, but not for sale or use in conjunction with commercial purposes. It may also be reproduced in full by non‐commercial entities for information or for educational purposes with prior permission from WHO/IASSID. The document is likely to be available in other languages also. For more information on this document, please visit the following websites: < http://www.uic.edu/orgs/rrtcamr/index.html > and < http://www.who.int/mental_health >.
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 | 0.005 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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