MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029564090 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.110671

Frederick Banting et les possibilites de recherche pour les omnipraticiens

2011· article· fr· W2029564090 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Iona Heath

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Research and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesMedicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

J’aurais bien aimé être là lorsque Banting s’est adressé à l’Association médicale canadienne en juin 1926. Je suppose qu’il y avait eu peu de femmes dans l’assistance et je me demande ce que l’auditoire avait pensé du jeune conférencier dont le curriculum vitae était déjà des

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Incentives · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.012
Scholarly communication0.0070.010
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0070.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.450
GPT teacher head0.521
Teacher spread0.071 · 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
DomainIncentives
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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