Role of executive dysfunction in predicting frequency and severity of violence
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
The adverse consequences of violence on society are tremendous. The proportion of offenders incarcerated for violent offenses is large, and the cost of keeping these offenders incarcerated is startling. Understanding and treating the causal underpinnings of violent crime is of utmost importance for individuals and society as a whole. Several factors have been identified as potential contributors to violent crime, including cognitive deficits in executive functioning [Hoaken et al., 2007]. To investigate this further, 77 offenders from Fenbrook Institution, a federal facility, were tested on a battery of executive functioning measures. Offenders were found to have broad and pervasive dysfunction in their executive abilities. In addition, specific scores from the battery were found using regression techniques, to predict the frequency and severity of past violent offending but not nonviolent offending. This speaks of the possibility of a new type of correctional rehabilitation program, one that focuses on the rehabilitation of basic executive functions.
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