MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621881283

The Analysand’s Presence

2014· article· de· W2621881283 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of psychoanalysis · 2014
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCourageVariety (cybernetics)Resistance (ecology)Psychoanalytic theoryPsychoanalysisLexiconPsychologySociologyEpistemologyPhilosophyPolitical scienceLinguisticsLawComputer scienceArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Though it may sound paradoxical, the analysand bears a certain responsibility for being “present” in his or her own analysis. The accuracy of this view is widely recognized in the psychoanalytic literature, though usually discussed indirectly, notably in the vast literature on “resistance.” The fact that the term resistance itself has been disappearing from our lexicon suggests that the issue of the analysand’s presence in the analysis has become more difficult to address for a variety of reasons. Among these may be the increasing emphasis we place in contemporary analytic theory on the analyst’s responsibilities. With brief clinical illustrations, this article explores the balance of presence in the analytic situation, and the role of courage.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.296 · 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