MétaCan
ENFR
Menu
Cohort builder

4,299,418 works, Canadian by any of four routes.

Every filter state is a URL; the URL is the query; the query is citable via /q/⟨hash⟩. The page, the API and the export parse the same parameters.

Export CSVExport JSONAPI query

The current cohort, streamed from the database: every work column, the machine labels, the provisional scores, and the per-row validation status. Exports are capped at 100,000 rows. Mints a permanent /q/ link for this exact query. The same filters always produce the same link, whoever asks.

Search term
Author
Year range
→
Sort
Language
Type
Field
Venue
IEEE Design & Test of Computers
Topic
Retraction
Abstract
Evidence source
Study design
Label agreement
Label status

Direct Codex and Gemma labels are unvalidated and sparse. Distilled predictions cover the full frame and are also unvalidated. Choose the evidence source explicitly; absence of a direct label is never a negative label.

affaffiliation
fundfunder
venuejournal
aboutaboutness

The four routes compose: require the funder route and exclude affiliation to get the funder-only stratum no affiliation-based frame ever sees.

22 results · 1 filter active ·
Results by year
20022012
Publication date
Categories
Machine labels · sparse coverage
Evidence
Language
Type
Citations
An unlabeled work is unknown, not a negative. Label coverage is reported on every query.
22 works in the cohort · of 4,299,418page 1 of 1

Labels cover 0 of 22 works in this cohort. The rest are unlabeled, which is not a negative label: the label table is sparse today and grows as labeling rounds land.

Distilled predictions cover 22 of 22 works in this cohort. Predictions are machine_predicted_unvalidated. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work (title-only); the Codex side is a distilled, calibrated classifier. Candidate is the union; consensus is the intersection.

afffundunlabeled
A Survey and Taxonomy of GALS Design Styles
Paul Teehan, Mark R. Greenstreet, Guy Lemieux
2007· article· en· IEEE Design & Test of Computers· Computer Science
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
177
citations
affunlabeled
Overview of Debug Standardization Activities
Bart Vermeulen, Karen Rolf, Jeff Rearick, Neal Stollon, Gary Swoboda
2008· article· en· IEEE Design & Test of Computers· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
20
citations
affunlabeled
Low-Power Design Using the Si2 Common Power Format
Susan Carver, Anmol Mathur, L. K. Sharma, P.M.V. Subbarao, Steve Urish, Qi Wang
2012· article· en· IEEE Design & Test of Computers· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
8
citations
affunlabeled
A Quality-Driven Design Approach for NoCs
S. Bourduas, Jean-Samuel Chenard, Željko Žilić
2008· article· en· IEEE Design & Test of Computers· Computer Science
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
5
citations
fundno affunlabeled
Bringing up a chip on the cheap
Megan Wachs, Ofer Shacham, Zain Asgar, Amin Firoozshahian, Stephen Richardson, Mark Horowitz
2011· article· en· IEEE Design & Test of Computers· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
4
citations
aboutno affunlabeled
Time to retire our benchmarks
Rob Aitken
2010· article· en· IEEE Design & Test of Computers· Computer Science
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearchconsensus · none
2
citations
affunlabeled
A Brief History of Multiprocessors and EDA
Sandeep K. Shukla, Prabhat Mishra, Željko Žilić
2011· article· en· IEEE Design & Test of Computers· Computer Science
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
1
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
ITC 2003: Breaking Test Interface Bottlenecks
Robert Aitken, Gordon W. Roberts
2003· article· en· IEEE Design & Test of Computers· Computer Science
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
affunlabeled
FPGAs, Programming Models, and Kit Cars
Vaughn Betz
2011· article· en· IEEE Design & Test of Computers· Computer Science
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About