Sexsomnia – Excusable or Just Insane?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a number of recent cases, people charged with sexual offences have raised sexsomnia as a defence. Sexsomnia is a variant of sleepwalking, and the gist of the defence is that the accused’s conduct was involuntary, carried out while in an automatistic state. The law recognises two types of automatism: sane and insane.The former results in a complete acquittal whereas the latter leads to a special verdict of not guilty on the grounds of insanity or mental illness/impairment/disorder. Judges in Canada, England and Australia have relied on tests such as the internal/external and continuing danger tests to determine whether automatism is caused by a disease of the mind, and therefore insane. However, these tests are unhelpful in sexsomnia cases and the outcomes have been inconsistent. The recent Canadian Court of Appeal case of R v Luedecke provides a useful model for future sexsomnia cases.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".