MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986758577 · doi:10.1016/j.jmir.2010.03.004

Proceedings from RTi3 2010: Inquire, Inspire, Innovate: The 7th Annual Radiation Therapy Conference, University of Toronto, Department of Radiation Oncology

2010· article· en· W1986758577 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amanda Bolderston, Tara Rosewall, Ruth Barker, Angela Cashell, Kathleen Conway, Lisa DiProspero, Terri Flood, Nicole Harnett, C. S. Palmer, Effie Slapnicar, David Wiljer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of medical imaging and radiation sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreMichener InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiation oncologyRadiation TherapistRelevance (law)Event (particle physics)Medical educationMedicineLibrary sciencePolitical scienceRadiation therapyComputer scienceSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0720.020

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.282
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 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of medical imaging and radiation sciencesSame topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207