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
Human beings have reliable preferences for energy-rich foods; these preferences are present at birth and possibly innate. Relatively recent changes in our day-to-day living context have rendered such foods commonly encountered, nearly effortless to procure, and frequently brought to mind. Theoretical, conceptual, and empirical perspectives from the field of social neuroscience support the hypothesis that the increase in the prevalence of overweight and obesity in first- and second-world countries may be a function of these dynamics coupled with our highly evolved but ultimately imperfect capacities for self-control. This review describes the significance of executive-control systems for explaining the occurrence of nonhomeostatic forms of dietary behavior—that is, those aspects of calorie ingestion that are not for the purpose of replacing calories burned. I focus specifically on experimental findings—including those from cortical-stimulation studies—that collectively support a causal role for executive-control systems in modulating cravings for and consumption of high-calorie foods.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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