Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obtaining access to safe and affordable medicines is a critical goal. AARP has long favored a system of prescription drug coverage for the vulnerable. However, until recently, there was no public coverage for medicines. With Medicare Part D, the issue becomes even more important. Although not perfect, Medicare Part D provides us with a start to addressing the problem of safe and affordable medicines in the United States. Part of the discussion in improving Medicare Part D includes allowing cheaper drugs from other countries, such as Canada, which has a strict regulatory structure. On the basis of AARP trips and assessments, Canada is a good choice. Because of its regulatory structure and the good experiences of patients who buy their medications there, it is an available alternative for getting cheaper drugs. The Dorgan-Snowe Bill, which would allow importation, is supported by AARP, because it allows importation from Canada with safeguards to ensure legitimate drugs are being sold. However, overall, we need to improve the policy available for access to prescription drugs, because of the increasing need for prescription drugs as additional people face the high costs of health care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".