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
Richard Bessel discusses perceptions of violence in the modern western world and the modern perception that our own times are more violent than centuries past. The multitude of modern studies reflects the conviction that violence is inherently undesirable, a profound social evil that can be checked. He places the shift in attitudes to the Enlightenment era of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, but it was not until after the Second World War that the focus moved from group bloodletting to violence against the individual. It is never clear whether Bessel shares the attitudes he writes about or is merely content to reflect upon them. This is most problematic in his definition of violence, which slips rapidly from war, murder, assault, rape and physical attack to verbal aggression, intimidation, threats and belittlement felt subjectively. Violence can also include neglect, or acts of omission, on top of those of commission; profanation and irreverence are also cast onto the heap. Any situation of disharmony between two people might be categorised as violence. The underlying confusion of X=Y makes it difficult for the reader to seize the nettle of the problem. He deploys his reflections under eight headings, Spectacle, Religion, Revolution, Politics, War, Women and Children, Control and Memory. There is not much attempt at demonstration or even sustained analysis: these are reflections based on historical literature.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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