La singular relación entre derecho comunitario y derecho interno: a propósito del Real Decreto 178/2003, sobre entrada y permanencia de ciudadanos comunitarios
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poor estimation of one's future actions has been associated with the influence of reward over executive control processes during prospection. However, the neural mechanisms underlying this reward-control trade-off remain poorly understood. In the present study, we take advantage of projection bias, underestimating how motivations will change in the future, to examine brain and behavior changes during prospection about future decisions. To manipulate motivation, we altered satiety (hungry vs. satiated) and asked human participants (N = 25) to place bids on snack foods while undergoing fMRI scanning across two sessions. While hungry, participants bid for the right to consume snacks in both a future congruent motivational state (hungry) and a future incongruent motivational state (satiated). In a second session, while satiated, participants placed bids for the right to immediately consume the items. Imagination of a congruent future state was associated with brain activity in regions implicated in prospection. Imagination of an incongruent future state was related to brain activity in areas related to cognitive control. Projection bias, the difference between bids during incongruent prospection (hungry to satiated, session one) and realization (satiated, session two), was negatively related to thalamic and insular engagement. Bias was positively related to engagement of the ventral striatum, a region involved in reward processing. These results suggest that the relative activation between reward and control systems is influenced by the congruence of present and future motivational states, and shapes bias in predictions about future behavior.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it