DYNAMICS OF AGGRESSION INDICATORS IN PEOPLE IN PRISON DURING LUNAR MONTH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Influence of the lunar cycles on human activity and functional state remains a subject of debate. Research objective: identification of aggression indicators with use of the Bass-Darky method in individuals who were in prison in the dynamics of a lunar cycle. 298 people have been examined. One of problems of work - check of a hypothesis that actual lunar rhythms don't influence human state and the result of such influence is their coincidence with the cycles of a geo-heliophysical origin. Use of the moving average method and the spline method allowed to obtain curves of the aggression indicators during the lunar cycles and in their different quarters. It has been established that just before the full Moon, the indicators of indirect aggression, irritability, suspiciousness and sense of guilt had the maximum values, during the full Moon, the level of verbal aggression was the highest, after the full Moon period, the values of physical aggression were the highest. Sensitivity and negativism increased in the beginning of the II and IV quarters of the Moon. The second quarter of the Moon was a period of a synchronous increase of all aggression indicators except for physical aggression which was maximum in the IV quarter. The majority of the aggression indicators correlated with the dynamics of the Kr-index of the geomagnetic field recorded during the lunar month with a delay log 6-8 days, and for the indicator of physical aggression - with an advance of 2 days.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".