MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Consortium for Blood Group Genes (CBGG): 2009 report

2010· article· en· W142895934 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gregory A. Denomme, Connie M. Westhoff, Lilian Castilho, M. St‐Louis, Vagner Castro, Marion E. Reid

Bibliographic record

VenueImmunohematology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood groups and transfusion
Canadian institutionsHéma-Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenotypeGeneBiologyBioinformaticsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consortium for Blood Group Genes is a worldwide organization whose goal is to have a vehicle to interact, establish guidelines, operate a proficiency program, and provide education for laboratories involved in DNA and RNA testing for the prediction of blood group, platelet, and neutrophil antigens. Currently, the consortium operates with representatives from Brazil, Canada, and the United States. Membership is voluntary with the expectation that members actively contribute to discussions involving blood group genetics. This year witnessed a change in the standing committee membership and the institution of a representative for the human platelet antigens group. Looking forward, the consortium sees challenges for the nomenclature of blood group alleles and user-required specifications for laboratory information systems to store genotype information.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.494
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImmunohematologySame topicBlood groups and transfusionFrench-language works237,207