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
OBJECTIVE: This case report and discussion describe the psychiatric and social consequences of being a stalking victim, with particular focus on its impact on the victim's occupation. METHOD: Data were gathered from the assessment and arbitration hearing of a female employee who lost her job while being stalked. Computerized literature searches were used to identify relevant papers from psychiatric and legal journals. RESULTS: This case illustrates many of the common features of stalking. The female victim was harassed by a male after a failed intimate relationship. The victim suffered from depression, anxiety, guilt, shame, helplessness, humiliation, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The stalking affected her psychological, interpersonal, and occupational functioning. Consequently, she was fired for poor work performance and poor attendance. CONCLUSION: Stalking may affect a victim's ability to work in several ways. The criminal behaviours often interfere directly with work attendance or productivity and result in the workplace becoming an unsafe location. Further, stalking may indirectly affect a person's ability to work through the many adverse emotional consequences suffered.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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