MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7036220565

Amizade e Bem-Estar Subjetivo

2014· article· pt· W7036220565 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVitae (Universidad de Antioquia) · 2014
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, Innovation and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFriendshipFeelingLife satisfactionRomanceSubjective well-beingRelation (database)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Friendship contributes to subjective well-being, and this study analyzed the relationship between these variables. 116 university students from Belo Horizonte and 116 from Porto Alegre, both cities in Brazil, responded to the McGill Friendship Questionnaires, the PANAS scales and the Life Satisfaction Scale. Women showed more satisfaction and positive feelings towards their best friend; students from Belo Horizonte reported more negative feelings; friendship satisfaction correlated positively with life satisfaction and positive affect, but did not predict life satisfaction. There was a close, yet not causal, relation between subjective well-being and friendship. Joint satisfaction with friends, family, and romance is necessary for subjective well-being, as suggested by scientific literature. Research in Brazil could direct efforts to joint analyzes of these relationships.

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.

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), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.309
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.307 · 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