5th international workshop on software engineering in health care (SEHC 2013)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our ability to deliver timely, effective and cost efficient healthcare services remains one of the worlds foremost challenges. The challenge has numerous dimensions including: (a) the need to develop a highly functional yet secure electronic health record system that integrates a multitude of incompatible existing systems, (b) in-home patient support systems to reduce demand on professional health-care facilities, and (c) innovative technical devices such as advanced pacemakers that support other healthcare procedures. Responding to this challenge will necessitate increased development and usage of software-intensive systems in all aspects of healthcare services. However the increased digitization of healthcare has identified extensive requirements related to the development, use, evolution, and integration of health software in areas such as the volume and dependability of software required, and the safety and security of the associated devices. The goal of the fifth workshop on Software Engineering for Health Care (SEHC) is to discuss recent research innovations and to continue developing an interdisciplinary community to develop a research, educational and industrial agenda for supporting software engineering in the health care sector.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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 it