Communication Patterns of Adolescent Autism in Expressing Feelings to The Opposite Sex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Problems in this research is the pattern of communication conducted by adolescent autism in expressing feelings to the opposite sex and the uncontrolled behavior of adolescent autism in expressing the feeling to the opposite sex. The purpose of this study was to describe and explain the communication patterns of adolescent autism in expressing the feeling to the opposite sex as well to explain the uncontrollable behavior that may arise from autistic adolescents when feeling an attraction with the opposite sex. The type of this research is descriptive qualitative with the case study. Subjects in this study were autistic adolescents with an age range of 12 to 22 years, autistic adolescent parents, and teachers/therapists from autistic adolescents. Data collection techniques used are interviews, observation, and documentation. Data analysis techniques by collecting data, organizing data systematically then interpreting data to others. Of the 2 subjects studied showed that communication adolescent autism to the opposite sex that makes them interested tend to passive, 2 subjects cannot communicate their feelings to the opposite sex firmly and clearly. They are more likely to show interest by staring at the opposite sex for long periods of time, walking back and forth near the opposite sex, or following the opposite sex everywhere. Not all autistic teenagers who are getting interested in the opponent have uncontrollable behavior, from 2 subjects there is only 1 who likes to suddenly kiss and hug the opposite sex that attracts him.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".