MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2184258460

Alan Stone and the ethics of forensic psychiatry: an overview.

2008· article· en· W2184258460 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Glenn H. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTorture, Ethics, and Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMorse codeForensic psychiatryQuarter (Canadian coin)DialecticPsychologyPsychoanalysisLawHistoryPsychiatryPolitical sciencePhilosophyEngineeringArchaeologyEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1982, Alan Stone presented a keynote speech at the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law (AAPL) on the ethics of forensic psychiatry. That speech was sharply critical of the prevailing ethics standards and led forensic psychiatrists to study his ideas carefully. A quarter-century later, he returned to the AAPL's Annual Meeting to present his current thinking. This overview outlines the development of Stone's thought over 25 years and the dialectic among Stone and three critics: Paul Appelbaum, Ezra Griffith, and Stephen Morse. Stone is now more optimistic about the possibility of developing an ethic for forensic psychiatry.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.131
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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