Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social phobia is a common and often disabling condition, with an etiology that is not established. There is evidence at several levels for an interplay of biological and psychological processes in social phobia. Genetic studies show that both genetic and environmental factors are important, with evidence pointing to associations with 2 genetic conditions, autism and fragile X syndrome. Behavioral inhibition has emerged as an important precursor to social phobia and possibly to other anxiety disorders. Epidemiologic and clinical studies have suggested that factors within the family environment, such as overprotection, overcontrol, modeling of anxiety, criticism, and in some cases abuse, can play a role in the development of social phobia. During childhood, complex interactions between brain system disturbances that mediate responses to negative social cues and factors in the social setting may lead to the development of a distorted set of internal blueprints for social behavior. The impact of severe social anxiety on brain systems that mediate behavioral change may prevent patients from learning better blueprints. These can be taught through cognitive-behavioral therapies. The effective control of social anxiety with medications enables patients to recover; whether recovery can last after discontinuation of medications may depend on whether a new blueprint has been developed and whether stable changes in affected brain systems have occurred. Neuroimaging techniques are at the early stage of identifying abnormalities at the neurotransmitter and systems levels.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".