MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804124623 · doi:10.15173/ijrr.v1i1.3405

La HARM et la AIS comme échelles standardisées du risque en psychiatrie légale

2018· article· en· W2804124623 on OpenAlexaff
Noëmie Praud, Sébastien Prat

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Risk and Recovery · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmHumanitiesPsychologyMedicinePhilosophySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this letter, the authors review briefly the concept of risk assessment in psychiatry. They provide knowledge about the use of the Hamilton Anatomy of Risk Management (HARM) and Aggressive Incidents Scale (AIS), as risk assessment and management tools. They look at the limitations and benefits of using these assessment tools in France. (article in French)

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Risk and RecoverySame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207