MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141523413 · doi:10.1136/bmj.h4339

US psychologists banned from participating in national security interrogations

2015· article· en· W2141523413 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael McCarthy

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTorture, Ethics, and Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyNational securityPolitical scienceComputer securityCriminologyComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The American Psychological Association’s Council of Representatives has voted to prohibit psychologists from participating in national security interrogations. The measure was passed by a vote of 156-1, with seven abstentions and one recusal, on 7 August during the association’s 123rd annual convention in Toronto, Canada.1 The vote came after the release of a scathing report in July,2 which concluded that association officials had colluded with officials in the Central Intelligence Agency and the US Department of Defense to align its ethics policies with the policies of the George W Bush Administration on the definition of torture.3 In doing so, the association had allowed psychologists to participate …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0190.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.249
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicTorture, Ethics, and LawFrench-language works237,207