MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014284925 · doi:10.1080/08940881003701983

WIRMS 2009: Fifth International Workshop on Infrared Microscopy and Spectroscopy with Accelerator-based Sources

2010· article· en· W2014284925 on OpenAlexaffabout
Brant Billinghurst, Thomas Sayers Ellis, Tim May

Bibliographic record

VenueSynchrotron Radiation News · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsCanadian Light Source (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceSynchrotronSkyArt historyGeographyHistoryPhysicsMeteorologyOpticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Striking growth in the field and spectacular new science were the hallmarks of WIRMS 2009, the Fifth International Workshop on Infrared Microscopy and Spectroscopy with Accelerator Based Sources, which was held September 13–17, 2009, at The Banff Center in beautiful Banff, Alberta, Canada, surrounded by the majestic Rocky Mountains. This was the first time that WIRMS was held in Canada, following successful workshops at Porquerolles (France, 2001), Lake Tahoe (USA, 2003), Rathen (Germany, 2005), and Awaji (Japan, 2007). WIRMS 2009 was chaired by Brant Billinghurst, Tim May, and Luca Quaroni, and was made possible by generous sponsorship from the Canadian Light Source, CanmetENERGY, Bruker, Varian, the Canadian Institute for Synchrotron Radiation, Advanced Design Consulting USA Inc., Blue Sky Spectroscopy, and IUPAC. The 60 participants, from 20 light sources located all over the world, enjoyed four days of scientific talks, discussions, and posters surrounded by some of the continent's most stunning scenery as well as unseasonably beautiful weather.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.012

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSynchrotron Radiation NewsSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207