Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The International Society for Computational Biology (ISCB; http://www.iscb.org) presents the Seventeenth Annual International Conference on Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology (ISMB), organized jointly with the Eighth Annual European Conference on Computational Biology (ECCB; http://bioinf.mpi-inf.mpg.de/conferences/eccb/eccb.htm), in Stockholm, Sweden, 27 June to 2 July 2009. The organizers are putting the finishing touches on the year's premier computational biology conference, with an expected attendance of 1400 computer scientists, mathematicians, statisticians, biologists and scientists from other disciplines related to and reliant on this multi-disciplinary science. ISMB/ECCB 2009 (http://www.iscb.org/ismbeccb2009/) follows the framework introduced at the ISMB/ECCB 2007 (http://www.iscb.org/ismbeccb2007/) in Vienna, and further refined at the ISMB 2008 (http://www.iscb.org/ismb2008/) in Toronto; a framework developed to specifically encourage increased participation from often under-represented disciplines at conferences on computational biology. During the main ISMB conference dates of 29 June to 2 July, keynote talks from highly regarded scientists, including ISCB Award winners, are the featured presentations that bring all attendees together twice a day. The remainder of each day offers a carefully balanced selection of parallel sessions to choose from: proceedings papers, special sessions on emerging topics, highlights of the past year's published research, special interest group meetings, technology demonstrations, workshops and several unique sessions of value to the broad audience of students, faculty and industry researchers. Several hundred posters displayed for the duration of the conference has become a standard of the ISMB and ECCB conference series, and an extensive commercial exhibition showcases the latest bioinformatics publications, software, hardware and services available on the market today. The main conference is preceded by 2 days of Special Interest Group (SIG) and Satellite meetings running in parallel to the fifth Student Council Symposium on 27 June, and in parallel to Tutorials on 28 June. All scientific sessions take place at the Stockholmsmässan/Stockholm International Fairs conference and exposition facility. Contact: bj@iscb.org
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.371 | 0.405 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier 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".