Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alcoholics Anonymous is a fellowship of people addicted to alcohol, who share their experience from the period of drinking, but who primarily have ongoing personal struggles with unstable emotions, a disintegrated value system, broken social ties, and other consequences of their old lifestyle. Participants of AA meetings provide mutual support at every stage of recovery and gain hope for improvement in their situation. Acceptance and implementation of the principles of the AA Programme promote recovery and improvement in all areas of life. It helps achieve physical health, emotional stability and better social relations, and creates a stable normative system. Joining the AA Fellowship is very useful for almost every member. The principles and objectives of the AA Fellowship were inspired by American pragmatism. The article presents the constitutive features of this philosophical trend, the inspirations which the founders of the AA Fellowship followed, and data supporting the usefulness of the 12 Steps of AA in recovery from alcoholism.
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 | 0.016 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".