MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903303554

Dreams as Indicators of the Psychoanalytic Treatment Process

2018· article· en· W2903303554 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 · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoanalytic theoryAmbivalenceTheme (computing)PsychoanalysisAgency (philosophy)PsychologyProcess (computing)PsychotherapistSociologyComputer scienceSocial science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article a psychoanalytic treatment will be employed to illustrate the use of dreams as indicators of the psychoanalytic process. The author hopes to demonstrate that dreams offer indications about what is happening in the process of psychoanalytic treatment, and awareness of this is useful in furthering therapeutic goals. Another theme is the conflict about personal agency in which the patient and analyst were intertwined. The patient’s dreams showed her struggle to become an effective, creative, independent woman, rather than subordinating her interests and mind to men, or sacrificing her femininity, imitating men to function independently, while the author experienced his ambition to write this article with ambivalence. Freud’s “royal road” appears well furnished with speed limits, traffic directions, destination indicators, and warning signs.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.344
Teacher spread0.327 · 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