Revisión teórica en torno a la discusión sobre trastornos sexuales.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The human sexual behavior, including biological, psychosocial, behavioral, clinical, moral and cultural. The literature explains that the theories and sexual practices vary according to the times and cultures where they thrive. Thus, the result of the image that people have built on their own sexuality and that of others. Crespo, Labrador, & De La Puente (1995), indicate the complexity of establishing boundaries between normal, abnormal or pathological sexual behavior. According to the diagnostic classifications, sexual disorders are based on the subjective experience of discomfort and dissatisfaction with sexual activity itself, which include changes in physiological, anatomical, motor and emotional (Labrador & Crespo, 2001). Masters & Johnson (1996) studied the behavior of the human sexual response, from the psychological and physiological, dividing them into five phases represented in desire, arousal, plateau, orgasm and resolution, allowing them to describe the inherent sexual dysfunction, as which contributed to their ratings (Labrador & Crespo, 2001). Given the need to know the behavior of sexual problems, it is important to mention them, and thus provide a complete picture describing enabling to provide healthcare professionals identify, assess and treat them appropriately.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".