Bibliographic record
Abstract
Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Association NewsFull AccessAnnual Meeting Attendees Can Go Online to Revisit PresentationsMark MoranMark MoranSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:18 Nov 2005https://doi.org/10.1176/pn.40.22.0004aIn the digital age, anything that can be taped or filmed can be made to last, literally, forever.And now some of the best speakers at APA's annual meeting are preserved online in the Association's Online Information Library. Clinicians can listen to and in some cases watch lectures and symposia they missed at APA's 2005 annual meeting in Atlanta, Ga., while receiving continuing medical education (CME) credits.“Because of technological advances, we can now capture the audio and slides of important sessions at the annual meeting, as well as videos of some sessions, and preserve them as enduring materials for those who were not able to attend the meeting,” said Deborah Hales, M.D., director of APA's Division of Education and Career Development.Hales said even those clinicians who attended the live session and are viewing it online in the “library” for a second time can earn CME credit.“If you're interested enough to review something again, you can get the CME credits,” Hales said. “There's no penalty for studying something again.”Access to nine industry-supported symposia from the meeting is free, as is the special two-part symposium “Neuroscience for the Psychiatrist.” APA members can access other materials for a fee of $65, and the nonmember fee is $125.All of the material in the library is free to anyone who registered for and attended the annual meeting in Atlanta and can be accessed by keying in an annual meeting badge number. Those who attended the meeting but have lost or forgotten their badge number can receive it by calling (703) 907-8666.Among the stellar presentations that have been preserved in the library are“ Human Psychiatric Disorders: Genetic Models in Mice” by Eric Kandel, M.D.; “Stress and the Mind-Body Connection: Lessons From Neuroendocrinology” by Bruce McEwen, Ph.D.; “The Conflicting Worldviews of Sigmund Freud and Oskar Pfister: Keys to Understanding Patients” by Armand Nicholi Jr., M.D.; “Neurobiological Underpinnings of Psychotherapy” by Glen Gabbard, M.D.; and“ Psychiatry in the Genomic Era” by Thomas Insel, M.D.Hales said plans are under way to improve and expand the online library, with significantly more material to be added from APA's 2006 annual meeting in Toronto. “We are trying to move our technology into the 21st century to help our members keep up with what they need to know.”APA's Online Information Library can be accessed at .▪ ISSUES NewArchived
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.928 | 0.897 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".