MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004655250 · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2008.06.005

Biomedical innovation at the laboratory, clinical and commercial interface: A new method for mapping research projects, publications and patents in the field of microarrays

2008· article· en· W2004655250 on OpenAlexafffund
Andreï Mogoutov, Alberto Cambrosio, Peter Keating, Philippe Mustar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Informetrics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthOffice of Extramural Research, National Institutes of HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsField (mathematics)BiomedicineData scienceComputer scienceInterface (matter)SoftwareGovernment (linguistics)Information retrievalBioinformatics

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0150.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.272 · 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.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations30
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of InformetricsSame topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207