Bibliographic record
Abstract
Let us try to unpack nervous disease. What does it consist of? For one thing, most of the patients are tired, even exhausted, and one of the main components of the nervous picture is fatigue. Today, psychiatrists do not think of fatigue as a terribly important symptom. After such obvious sources as iron deficiency have been eliminated— and it has been determined that the patient is not suffering from one of those quasidelusional disorders such as “chronic fatigue syndrome”—most clinicians would be inclined to ascribe fatigue to depression. For patients, however, fatigue remains a hugely important matter. A study of Stirling County in Canada’s Atlantic provinces in 1970 found that only 6% of psychiatrists considered fatigue to be serious; by contrast, people in the community reported “feeling weak all over” as one of the most serious symptoms among a list of 46. In hospital charts today it is not uncommon to see the acronym “TATT,” Tired All The Time. The complaints of the fatigued and weary echo across the ages. In 1712 Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, en route in a journey, complained to a correspondent, “This is what writing tackle the Inn affords, and my head and hand are both disorder’d with fatigue, both of mind and body.” Lest psychological fatigue be thought mainly a women’s complaint, one of the “grand asthenics” of all time was Parisian novelist Marcel Proust, who, around the turn of the century, was so droopy with fatigue—his medical father had written a book on the subject! —that he barely made it from his bedchamber. His correspondence from 1909, for example, mentions fatigue throughout. On Friday, November 26, after his guests had departed, “I set about demolishing what I had written. And over my heart, fatigued from this absence of repose, voilà the fog that rolls in again. It’s about three in the afternoon and [another nervous] crisis seems to be starting up.” Whatever period or social class is under discussion, fatigue simply tumbles from the page.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.124 | 0.071 |
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".