The Unbearable Weight on Your Mind: The Physiological Dimension of Body Image Disturbances
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
The ideal body, according to Western society's standards of physical appearance, has become increasingly thinner. Body image disturbances, a phenomenon often associated with today's society's standards of thinness, are common among obese and eating-disordered subjects, and have recently been documented in normal weight subjects. The aim of this review is to propose a new biological interpretation of body image disturbances, not presenting them as a mere consequence of society's pressure to be thin, but as a result of body weight regulation. Early in life, a "set-point-related body image" that may be described as a schematized representation of one's body weight set-point, would be created by the central nervous system. This unconscious representation of one's body size and mass, would later act as an internal reference in processing weight relevant information. External cues concerning body weight (e.g. visual information regarding one's body shape) as well as internal cues (e.g. moving one's body against gravity) would both be compared, by the central nervous system, to the set-point-related body image. A difference between actual body size and setpoint-related body image could generate an "error signal" that would lead to body image disturbances. These disturbances, reflecting the error signal of the regulatory system, would in turn trigger corrective metabolic and behavioral mechanisms working to return body weight to set-point.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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