Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intr oductionIn On the History of the Psycho-Analytic Movement , Sigmund Freud (1966) reflects on his career and the challenges he faced in establishing his psychoanalytic theory.Returning to the thoughts of a much younger Freud early in his career, he writes, I pictured the future as follows: . . .science would ignore me entirely during my lifetime; some decades later, someone else would infallibly come upon the same things-for which the time was not now ripe-would achieve recognition for them and bring me honour as a forerunner whose failure had been inevitable.Meanwhile, like Robinson Crusoe, I settled down as comfortably as possible on my desert island.When I look back to those lonely years, away from the pressures and confusions of to-day, it seems like a glorious heroic age.(p.22) While Freud would eventually find others to join him on his deserted island, the tone of this book is often defensive, particularly in his account of his relationship with colleagues, including Carl Jung and Alfred Adler.His theories, now gaining popularity, would continue to be poorly received in the broader scientific community.Freud states that when his colleagues noted his work in their publications, it was often "short and not at all flattering-words such as 'eccentric ' , 'extreme ' , or 'very peculiar' would be used" (p.23)."At least a dozen times in recent years," he writes, "in reports of the proceedings of certain congresses and scientific bodies or in review of certain publications, I have read that now psychoanalysis is dead, defeated
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.017 |
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".