Havana syndrome: a scoping review of the existing literature
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
Since 2016, numerous American and Canadian diplomats and secret (intelligence) agents in Cuba, China, and other places in the world have experienced an abrupt onset of unusual clinical symptoms including, tinnitus, visual problems, vertigo, and cognitive difficulties, after they encountered strange sounds; this has been called "Havana syndrome" (HS). MEDLINE, Scopus, and Ovid databases from 2016 until 24 September 2021 were systematically searched for the related published manuscripts. The following search strategy was implemented: "Havana syndrome" OR "Neurological Symptoms and US Diplomats". The primary search yielded 120 publications. Only five original studies and 18 non-original articles were considered to be relevant. While these studies provided a constellation of signs and symptoms for HS, none provided a good level of evidence. In conclusion, Havana syndrome is a nonspecific neurological illness with an unidentified causative factor(s), an acute phase of auditory-vestibular symptoms and a chronic phase of nonspecific neurobehavioral symptoms. This syndrome should be considered and investigated as a health concern, and not as a political issue.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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