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
There has been an increasing awareness of the importance of leadership and decision making, including scientists and academics, over recent times. By whom and how decisions are made can have serious implications across all levels of society. Several people have been successful in their life and have been inflicted by excessive pride and self-confidence. There are times when the manifestations of such behaviours demonstrate noticeable signs of narcissism and on extreme cases, hubris. Hubris is an old concept originated from the Greek mythology. The risk of hubris affects politicians, leaders in business, scientists, academia, the military, entertainers, athletes and doctors (among many others). Power, especially absolute and unchecked power, is intoxicating and is manifested behaviourally in a variety of ways, ranging from amplified cognitive functions to lack of inhibition, poor judgment, extreme narcissism, deviant behaviour, and even cruelty. Hubristic behaviour of overconfidence, extreme pride together with an unwillingness to disregard advice makes powerful people in leadership positions to over-reach themselves with negative consequences for themselves and others. As the dangerous consequences of hubristic behaviours become more apparent and well described it is imperative that individuals, organisations and governments act to prevent such phenomena. Responsible leaders, including acclaimed scientists should exercise greater humility to the complexity and inherent uncertainty of their activities and strive to seek out and challenge hubristic behaviours.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Science and technology studies Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Theoretical or conceptual | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Theoretical or conceptual | low |
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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