L'effet de l'âge sur le répertoire et le plaisir sexuel
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
Le comportement sexuel et le niveau de plaisir associé aux activités sexuelles furent évalués en utilisant l'inventaire des comportements sexuels chez 119 hommes et femmes âgés de 19 à 48 ans et chez 172 femmes et hommes âgés de 52 à 75 ans. Une première analyse du répertoire sexuel montre que les activités sexuelles les plus fréquemment pratiquées chez les deux groupes sont très différentes. De plus, l'étendue du répertoire du groupe plus jeune fut significativement supérieure lorsqu'on le compare à celui des sujets plus âgés. Concernant le niveau de plaisir associé avec les activités sexuelles, les femmes plus jeunes rapportent un niveau significativement plus élevé de plaisir que les plus âgées. Cependant, le niveau de plaisir n'est pas significativement différent chez les hommes jeunes et plus âgés. The sexual behavior repertoire and the level of pleasure associated with sexual activities were evaluated using the Sexual Behavior Inventory in 119 men and women aged 19 to 48 and in 172 men and women aged 52 to 75. A first analysis of the sexual behavior repertoire showed that the most frequently practiced sexual activities by both groups were quite different in nature. Moreover, the extent of the sexual behavior repertoire of the younger group was significantly superior to the one declared by the older group. Regarding the level of pleasure associated with sexual activities, younger women reported a significantly higher level of pleasure than their older counterparts. However, the level of pleasure was not significantly different between the younger and older men.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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 it