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
Abstract Research on executive function has grown dramatically over the past three decades. Even though the term emerged only 40 years ago, the concept of executive function can be traced back to far earlier clinical and empirical research on the frontal lobes. After a brief overview of the history of executive function, we discuss influential theories of executive function. We next review the development of the prefrontal cortex and the neural substrate, which has been associated with executive function, and summarize research on particular component processes of executive function. Research on executive function faces a variety of methodological challenges that we review in the next section. The sources of executive function development are examined in the next section, with particular emphasis on the ways in which social factors and language facilitate its development. Our next section summarizes research of executive function on two other domains of functioning, namely, social understanding and academic achievement. The chapter concludes with the suggestion that executive function should be studied as a distributed process that develops as a result on the child's embodied interaction within a social context.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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