MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4383868491 · doi:10.1002/mp.15993

Past AAPM President: 2002

2023· editorial· en· W4383868491 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert G. Gould

Notice bibliographique

RevueMedical Physics · 2023
Typeeditorial
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueRadiation Dose and Imaging
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesUniversity of California, San FranciscoHarvard UniversityRadiological Society of North America
Mots-clésMedical physicistNuclear medicineMedicineMedical physicsLibrary scienceComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

I am Robert Gould and a professor emeritus in the Department of Radiology & Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco (UCSF). My duties at UCSF included clinical activities and academic research and I had significant responsibilities for implementing the Department's PACS infrastructure. I joined the AAPM in 1972 as a graduate student at the University of Pennsylvania in a medical physics program directed by Dr. John Hale, the third president of the AAPM. In 1974, I moved to a medical physics program at Harvard University directed by Dr. Bengt Bjarngard, the 20th president of the AAPM. My thesis advisor at Harvard was Dr. Edward Webster, the fifth president of the AAPM. My first major position within the AAPM was that of Scientific Program Director for the 1986 annu meeting held in Lexington, KY. I remained active on the Program Committee, chairing it from 1993 to 1998 and was the AAPM Scientific Program director on the Radiological Society of North America Program Committee from 1994 to 1998. I became president of the AAPM in 2002 with the Society approaching a membership count of 5000 and an annual budget of approximately 5 million, reflecting a robust and growing society. It was the year in which an alignment was agreed to between the AAPM and ACMP on examining boards. A concern, which extended over a number of years, was that while the Annual Meeting was growing, the participation of diagnostic imaging physics was declining reflected in the number of proffered diagnostic abstracts decreasing by about 50% over the previous 5 years. In a multi-year effort to strengthen the participation of diagnostic medical physicists at the Annual Meeting, and to better coordinate between scientific, educational, technical, and social components of the meeting, the Meeting Coordination Committee was formed in 2001, with 2002 as the first Annual Meeting under its guidance. Another challenge was that Sol Trofi, Jr., the Executive Director of the AAPM starting in 1994 and under whose guidance the AAPM prospered, announced his retirement at the end of 2003 but presented a transition plan where Angela Keyser, his Deputy Executive Director, would take his position. The Board approved this promotion and Angela has proved to be a superb choice. The 2002 Annual Meeting was held in Montreal, Canada as a joint meeting with the Canadian Organization of Medical Physics and, certainly in part due to the Canadian participation, had a record number of scientific abstract submissions (750) and an increased percentage of diagnostic abstracts. The Presidential Symposium was titled “Perspectives on Radiation Exposure” and speakers included John Cameron and Bernard Cohen. The Local Arrangement Committee was headed by Ervin Podgorsak, the 2007 Coolidge Award winner, and included a concert in the Notre Dame Basilica and a memorable dinner and entertainment with acrobatics and a Celine Dion impersonator. I am privileged to have been a president of the AAPM and feel the Society benefits its members scientifically and professionally and personally. Contacts I made through participation in AAPM Committees and as President helped in my academic advancement, in my understanding of professional challenges faced by basic scientists in an MD environment, and created lasting friends.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,345
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,934

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,009
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0030,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,001
Communication savante0,0130,004
Science ouverte0,0020,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0110,007
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,3450,444

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,301
Écart entre enseignants0,288 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueMedical PhysicsMême sujetRadiation Dose and ImagingTravaux en français237 207