MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323920619 · doi:10.1002/alz.13010

Integral brain health: Cerebral/mental/social provisional definitions

2023· article· en· W4323920619 on OpenAlex
Vladimir Hachinski

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

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthFunction (biology)PsychologyCognitionPsychological resilienceSocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brain health matters to everyone, we all need to know what it is. The digital age, the knowledge-based society, and expanding virtual worlds require greater cognitive capacity and mental and social resilience to function and to contribute; and yet there are no agreed definitions for brain, mental, or social health. Moreover, no definition encompasses all three or recognizes their integrated, interactive nature. Such a definition would: Help integrate relevant facts lingering behind specialized definitions and jargons. Promote a more holistic approach to patients. Create synergies among disciplines. The new definition would come in three versions: A lay, a scientific, and a customized one depending on the purpose, for example, research, education, policy, and so forth. Buttressed by evolving evidence integrated and update through a Brainpedia, they would focus attention on the greatest investment that individuals and society can make: Integral brain health: Cerebral/mental/social, in a safe, healthy, and supportive environment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.012

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.242 · 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