MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980603096 · doi:10.1167/iovs.13-13195

The TFOS International Workshop on Contact Lens Discomfort: Introduction

2013· article· en· W1980603096 on OpenAlexaff
Jason J. Nichols, Lyndon Jones, J. Daniel Nelson, Fiona Stapleton, David A. Sullivan

Bibliographic record

VenueInvestigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Eye InstituteAllerganSantenCooperVision
KeywordsContact lensOptometryMedicineOphthalmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Workshop was modeled after two prior workshops, both sponsored by TFOS: the Dry Eye Workshop (DEWS; provided in the public domain by TFOS at http://www.tearfilm.org/tearfilm-reports-dews-report.php) and the Meibomian Gland Dysfunction (MGD; provided in the public domain by TFOS at http://www.tearfilm.org/tearfilm-reports-mgdreport.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0500.021

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations44
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInvestigative Ophthalmology & Visual ScienceSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207