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
In his account of clinical neuroscience and subjectivity, Gillett (2009) provides three examples of neurological conditions that dramatically affect the lived experience of the individual: locked in syndrome, persistent vegetative state, and minimally conscious state. Yet for individuals with mental illnesses such as severe addiction, embodied subjectivity may have different implications for human identity. Because attitudes towards individuals with addiction are heavily moralized, being somebody somewhere with an addiction may result in both self- and other-labeling, and consequently, a development of a “spoiled” public identity. Our response will briefly focus on the potential implications of neuroscience and human subjectivity in addiction. Using the so-called “brain disease” model of addiction as an illustrative example, we argue that the development of a stigmatizing identity of an ‘addict’ is gradual, and emerges through a complex process which includes, but is not limited to, the individual’s narrative history, social lived experience, neuro-genetics, and a self-labeling process. Since identity emerges from, in part, and is preserved through relationships, a stigmatizing illness identity considerably affects the being-in-the-world-with-others for “the addict”.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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