MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sobre las palabras de Borges y Lugones

2003· article· en· W2454442 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luis Veres

Bibliographic record

VenueEspéculo: Revista de Estudios Literarios · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBorges, Kipling, and Jewish Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treatment outcome of 72 chronic back pain patients was assessed with 4 standardized measures: the McGill Pain Questionnaire, the Audiovisual Taxonomy of Pain Behavior, the Beck Depression Inventory, and the Profile of Mood States. Patients were also rated by their primary nurse on pain behavior, activity, drug-seeking, and sleep. Variables used to predict scores on outcome measures included patients' demographics and MMPI scores. Multiple regression analyses indicated that patients receiving worker's compensation engaged in more pain behavior and rated their pain as more severe, both upon admission and discharge from the pain program. High scores on the MMPI Hy scale were correlated with high self-ratings of pain and several MMPI scales correlated with negative mood. Even though demographic variables predicted admission and discharge scores on a number of treatment outcome measures, there was no relation between demographics and patients' improvement on treatment outcome measures. Patients with high scores on MMPI Hy and D scales displayed greatest admission to discharge improvement on self-rated pain and mood. Results were integrated with findings from previous studies. It was suggested that by distinguishing between overall scores on treatment outcome measures and improvement on these measures, professionals will be in a better position to devise individualized treatment plans for pain patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.213 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEspéculo: Revista de Estudios LiterariosSame topicBorges, Kipling, and Jewish IdentityFrench-language works237,207