Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review article explores the evidence that testosterone is significantly correlated with certain forms of aggression in a number of animals, although firm evidence is lacking for humans. Studies have revealed that structures within the limbic system are particularly involved in the elicitation of aggression and are sexually dimorphic. Testosterone can exert its effects in one of two ways: either on androgen receptors after conversion to 5-alpha dihydrotestosterone or on estrogen receptors after aromatization to estradiol. It can act via genomic mechanisms to induce production of proteins or via non genomic mechanisms to modulate neural activity. Androgen and estrogen receptors are also found along neurotransmitter pathways. As such, testosterone is able to modulate levels of various neurotransmitters that show evidence of mediating effects on aggressive behaviour. In addition, recent evidence suggests that these neurotransmitters are involved in processes such as olfaction and arousal and suggestions have been put forward explaining how testosterone may modulate these processes. However there is a critical time period early in life, usually within the first few days after birth, during which testosterone exposure is essential to elicit aggression in adulthood. It is thought that testosterone and its metabolites sensitize an androgen-responsive system, while estrogenic metabolites establish the capacity to fight in response to estrogenic stimulation later in life. Despite this, testosterone is only one of a myriad of factors that influence aggression and the effects of previous experience and environmental stimuli have at times been found to correlate more strongly.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".