MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002288888

Who Is Afraid of Wilfred Bion

2019· article· en· W3002288888 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
W. Clifford M. Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of psychoanalysis · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoanalytic theoryUnconscious mindPsychoanalysisPresentation (obstetrics)PsychologyPsychotherapistMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“Who Is Afraid of Wilfred Bion?” contains updated notes prepared for the opening presentation of a two-day meeting, arranged by the Los Angeles Psychoanalytic Society, 12–13 October 1985 on Bion’s work. Other papers at the meeting were on groups, thinking, epistemology, the Grid, the psychotic core, the present London view of Bion, and Bion’s creative but classical exploration of unconscious processes. An audiotape of Bion was discussed. The other speakers were Caron, Ganzarain, Gorski, Grotstein, Mason, Patterton, Paul, Vaquer, and Wisdom.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.012
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0070.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.008

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 head0.309
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of psychoanalysisSame topicPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207