MEGA <sup> <i>♪</i> </sup> —Empirical Support for Nomenclature on the Anomalies
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
Applied are empirical findings supporting the authors' previously presented nomenclature identifying two subsets of sexually abusive youth overlooked by most contemporary risk assessment tools: sexually violent and predatory sexually violent youth. The cross-validation findings on an ecologically framed risk assessment tool, MEGA (♪) (Multiplex Empirically Guided Inventory of Ecological Aggregates for Assessing Sexually Abusive Children and Adolescents [Ages 19 and Under]) (N = 1,056 male and female sexually abusive youth, ages 4-19, including youth with low intellectual functioning), from the United States, Canada, England, and Scotland, were utilized. Findings provided normative data, with cutoff scores according to age and gender. Most contemporary risk assessment tools have three levels (low, moderate, and high), which may in fact be limited in assessing the range of risk level. The MEGA (♪) cross-validation established a new range of risk level, with the fourth level (very high) definitively identifying the most dangerous youth, thus empirically supporting the nomenclature of sexually violent and predatory sexually violent youth.
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) | 0.000 | 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