MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043792777 · doi:10.1260/1708-5284.10.3.191

Nanotechnology and medical devices: Risk, regulation and ‘meta’ registration

2013· article· en· W2043792777 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiotechnology and Related Fields
Canadian institutionsAlberta Bone and Joint Health Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)NanotechnologyRisk analysis (engineering)Risk assessmentData scienceComputer scienceEngineeringMaterials scienceMedicinePolitical scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new approach to risk assessment for nanotechnology in healthcare includes the mapping of particles to risk profiles and the potential channels for the collection of relevant information. This relates assay type to processes probed and the recognition of the relevance of this to particle pathways. It is only by ensuring the sound regulation of this throughout the ‘life cycle’ of translational research and development, which we can ensure the true provenance of materials that we intend to use in the clinical environment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.553
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.213
Teacher spread0.207 · 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