Notice bibliographique
Résumé
O n June 28th, the Supreme Court of the united States announced its decision on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.for the country' s health policy watchers, the wait had been as long -and the tension was as high -as for kids on Christmas morning.The lead-up began months before.There was endless speculation about what the result would be.Would the Court find that the individual mandate was valid or not?What about the other provisions of the Act?How would the vote split?Commentators from across the political spectrum weighed in, as did the stock market and gamblers (Hancock 2012).And finally, the morning of the decision' s announcement arrived.Because it would have profound effects for healthcare, and possibly for the upcoming presidential race, major media outlets treated the story as breaking news.They were broadcasting developments live, each aiming to be first to get the news out.Almost as interesting as the decision itself (Supreme Court of the united States 2012) was the drama that unfolded around the announcement (Goldstein 2012).Within the Court, the usual protocols and ceremonies were observed.The marshal of the Court gaveled the Courtroom to order.The Justices took the bench.Outside, millions were anxiously waiting to learn what the decision would be.With the high volume of traffic, the Supreme Court' s website failed.As a result, everyone outside the Court, including President Obama, were dependent on the media at the Court to get the results.I happened to be in New York for a health policy meeting that day.As the clock ticked past 10 o' clock, participants from the united States were risking repetitive strain injury by pressing the "refresh" buttons on their browsers as fast as they could to see the news as soon as it was available.Bloomberg was first to publish that the decision had been issued and also first to report on the results (Goldstein 2012).fifty-two seconds after the Chief Justice began speaking at 10:06:40, Bloomberg announced that the Court had upheld the Act.Shortly thereafter, so did Reuters, Associated Press and dow Jones.But initial on-air reports and social media posts from CNN and fox News got the results wrong.In just a few minutes, these messages reached thousands, maybe millions, of people.Those without access to a copy of the judgment were left wondering who was right.Ironically, while new technology compressed the news cycle and helped to spread incorrect information quickly, it also contributed to solving the problem.many, including the president' s Breaking News in Health Policy and the Power of Social Media editorial
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,012 | 0,038 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,018 |
| Communication savante | 0,032 | 0,023 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,009 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,011 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,019 | 0,003 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».