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
Many fields in social sciences, such as criminology (Dubois & Vrancken, 2014), sociology (Rose, 1999), and social work (Rogowski, 2012), have spoken out against the dangers of psychologization, that is, the tendency to pay exclusive attention to the subjective dimension of various phenomena, at the detriment of social components. Many social events and phenomena are indicative of the increasing importance of psychology in the public sphere such as the proliferation of reality shows focused on particular psychological issues (Hoarding; Buried Alive; Intervention) or the media coverage of spousal homicides, which focuses almost solely on the perpetrator's mental distress, thus omitting the sociopolitical aspects indicating that the great majority of these homicides are committed by men toward women (Ryan, Anastario, & DaCunha, 2006). The ubiquity of psychology in contemporary societies has become somewhat of a “social fact.” As we will demonstrate, social work cannot—and should not—resist this new psychologically informed social setting, but must critically engage with this manner of constructing social problems.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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