The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Archetypes and Entropy: Theory-Driven Extraction of Evidence for Suicide Risk
Open accessAbstract
Vasudha Varadarajan, Allison Lahnala, Adithya V Ganesan, Gourab Dey, Siddharth Mangalik, Ana-Maria Bucur, Nikita Soni, Rajath Rao, Kevin Lanning, Isabella Vallejo, Lucie Flek, H. Andrew Schwartz, Charles Welch, Ryan Boyd. Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on Computational Linguistics and Clinical Psychology (CLPsych 2024). 2024.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Fifteen studies used only open-source models.
“fifteen used only open-source models [67,72,73,96,98,113,129]”
From Explainability of decoder-only clinical large language models: A scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [73]
A second group derives the explanatory structure from a domain-specific theoretical framework rather than a single instrument.
“A second group derives the explanatory structure from a domain-specific theoretical framework rather than a single instrument, exemplified by the suicidal archetypes derived from Joiner's Interpersonal Theory of Suicide [73].”
From Explainability of decoder-only clinical large language models: A scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [73]
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Xu, Y., Hu, J., Song, P., Duan, Z., & Yang, X. (2026) · International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) · doi:10.1145/3774904.3792594 · Cited by 1
Explainability of decoder-only clinical large language models: A scoping review
Mishra, N., Abu-Hanna, A., & Calixto, I. (2026) · Artificial Intelligence in Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.artmed.2026.103501
Metadata
- Authors
- Varadarajan, V., Lahnala, A., V Ganesan, A., Dey, G., Mangalik, S., Bucur, A.-M., Soni, N., Rao, R., Lanning, K., Vallejo, I., Flek, L., Schwartz, H. A., Welch, C., & Boyd, R.
- Affiliations
- Stony Brook University (US)
- Bonn Aachen International Center for Information Technology (DE)
- University of Bucharest (RO)
- Florida Atlantic University (US)
- University of Bonn (DE)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on Computational Linguistics and Clinical Psychology (CLPsych 2024)
- Published
- 2024
- Pages
- 278-291
- OpenAlex
- W7126398943
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1
- FWCI
- 0.67
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Workshop on Computational Linguistics and Clinical Psychology (CLPsych) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Office of the Director of National Intelligence
- Stony Brook University
- National Institutes of Health
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
- Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
- Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity
- National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01AA028032)
- National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (U01OH012476)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
- Keywords
- suicide risk, archetypes, entropy (information theory), clinical text, suicide risk assessment, evidence extraction, clinical psychology, natural language processing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
