MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280557497 · doi:10.1177/0957154x221075240

‘Regarding the scientific viewpoint in psychiatry’, lecture by Carl Wernicke (1880)

2022· article· en· W4280557497 on OpenAlex
Stephan Heckers, Kenneth S. Kendler, Astrid Klee

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHistory of Psychiatry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresentation (obstetrics)PsychologyPsychopathologyGermanEngramCognitive sciencePsychoanalysisNeurosciencePsychiatryMedicinePhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1880 Carl Wernicke gave this plenary lecture at an annual meeting of German physicians and natural scientists. He used principles from his 1874 aphasia monograph to build a neural model of mental illness. He proposed that the brain keeps a record of experiences in distinct areas of the sensory and motor cortices in the form of memory images, which allows for recognition of objects and the planning of motor acts. He conjectured that imperfections, partial defects and complete loss of such memory images lead, respectively, to mild, moderate and severe forms of psychopathology in sensory and motor realms. The lecture is an early presentation of Wernicke's system of psychiatry. Several of his concepts have remained relevant in contemporary neuroscience.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score0.822

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.206 · 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