MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021495963 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.110303

Did Abraham Flexner spark the founding of CMAJ?

2011· article· en· W2021495963 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jacalyn Duffin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Research and Practices
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSPARK (programming language)Library scienceMedicineOperations researchClassicsPolitical scienceHistoryComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Medical Association (CMA) formed in 1867, but its journal did not appear until 44 years later. Why 1911? Scholars have already documented the essential factors: a longstanding willingness of the CMA to found a national journal, the availability of a talented editor in Andrew Macphail

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0080.021
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicMedical Research and PracticesFrench-language works237,207