Are Our Definitions of Women's Desire, Arousal and Sexual Pain Disorders Too Broad and Our Definition of Orgasmic Disorder Too Narrow?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since each individual female sexual dysfunction is complex, it is necessary to subtype them in addition to dividing them into life-long or acquired disorder. The complexity of women's sexual arousal necessitates appreciation of a number of different types of arousal disorders that vary not only in etiology but also in management. The coexistence of sexual arousal and sexual desire, which develops during a sexual experience, explains the frequent comorbidity of arousal and desire disorders. Subtyping of hypoactive sexual desire disorder allows analysis of lack of receptivity and of any marked loss of the traditional markers of sexual desire over and beyond a normative lessening with relationship duration. Dyspareunia and vaginismus require further analysis prior to any definitive therapy. The definition of orgasmic disorder needs to include loss of orgasmic intensity and the possibility of coincident arousal disorder.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.060 | 0.093 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.048 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.026 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.028 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".