MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388638880 · doi:10.4324/9781032664637-19

The Copenhagen Rehabilitation Centre For Torture Victims

2023· book-chapter· en· W4388638880 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
E Pedersen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTorture, Ethics, and Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTortureRehabilitationPsychologyCriminologyMedicinePolitical sciencePhysical therapyLawHuman rights

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Victims of torture have existed throughout history, but it was not until the aftermath of the Second World War and the atrocities of the German concentration camps that the medical profession began to conduct any serious research into the effects of torture. Between 1974 and 1982, medical groups, usually working under the auspices of Amnesty International, carried out examinations in several countries all over the world, in Canada, France, the Netherlands, the USA, Italy, Sweden, Great Britain and the Argentine. The Rehabilitation Centre for Torture Victims was opened in Copenhagen in 1982. There is an interdisciplinary approach to the treatment within a standard treatment programme, consisting of psychotherapy, based on the victim’s torture-situation, physiotherapy, general somatic treatment and social counselling, plus the treatment of the victim’s spouse and/or children.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTorture, Ethics, and LawFrench-language works237,207