MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389163530 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-42742-8_4

Building Expert Certifiers: The Rise of Psychological Physicians

2023· book-chapter· en· W4389163530 on OpenAlexaff
Filippo Maria Sposini

Bibliographic record

VenueMental health in historical perspective · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationSubject (documents)CertificatePromotion (chess)InsanitySet (abstract data type)PsychologyPeriod (music)Medical educationPolitical scienceMedicineLawPsychiatryComputer scienceLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter examines the connection between the legal provisions for the certification of insanity and the promotion of medical psychology as a teaching subject. It focuses on Britain between 1853 and 1890, because legal requirements during this period remained relatively unvaried, and because developments during these years set the stage for the introduction of the 1886 Certificate of Psychological Medicine. The central thesis is that the certification system enacted in 1853 served as the basis for the introduction of medical psychology as an essential subject for all medical professionals.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.441
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.116
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 venueMental health in historical perspectiveSame topicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical PracticesFrench-language works237,207