Implications of Machine-Learning, Internet-Tests to Save Lives and Money: "7-Point Violence Profile:" Review of 212 Studies, 320,051 Persons, Over 95 Years, With a Cross-Validation Among 136 Homicidal, Overdosing- Substance-Abusing, Sex-Offending,
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analysis of 136 persons with psychopathology, suicidal ideation, and violence included: (a) 79 adults [12 homicidal, 13 overdosing-substance-abusers, 15 sex-offending, 15 suicide-completers, 24 controls (23 women, 56 men) Mage=38.29]; and (b) 57 teens [11 homicidal, 7 overdosing-substance-abusers, 10 sex-offending, 17 suicide-completers, 12 controls (15 girls, 42 boys) Mage= 15.37] given (Standard Predictor of Violence Potential (SP), Quick Test (QT), Beck Scale (BSS), MMPI-2/A, Raven Matrices). Significant (p < .05) ANOVA Fs were: (a) adults (SP, BSS, MMPI-2 [VRIN, F, FB, FP, L, K, S, Hs (1), D (2), Pd (4), Mf (5), Pa(6), Pt(7), Sc (8), Ma (9), Si (10), MAC-R, APS, AAS], Raven; and (b) teens (SP, BSS, MMPI-A [F1, F, L, K, D (2), Pa (6), Sc (8)], QT. At-risk, adults, and teens had the same “7-point violence profile” (SP -, “F/L-2-4-6-8-AAS(ACK)”) [insignificant differences (p < .05) ANOVA-Fs: SP, BSS, MMPI-2/A: F, L, K, D (2), Pd (4), Pa (6), Sc (8)].
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".