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 article reviews research on railway and metro (underground and subway) suicides around the world. Although the incidence and survival rates vary and standardized methodologies are lacking, it is evident that there is a high incidence among psychiatric patients and at stations, crossings, and track areas near psychiatric institutions. Fictional and news reports of railway and metro suicides are related to increased rates, and false beliefs about a certain, fatal, and painless outcome may contribute to use of this method. Train drivers and rail personnel are often traumatized and in need of personal support after the incident. Most prevention involves surveillance, limiting access to tracks, or prompt intervention during an attempt. Other potential strategies include focusing upon the high-risk populations of previous attempters and patients in psychiatric facilities near stations and tracks and changing attitudes concerning the acceptability of this method to ensure that potentially suicidally active individuals are not under the illusion that this is a certain and painless method of death.
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) | 0.001 | 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