Editorial: Advances in Understanding Alzheimer's Disease, and the Contributions of Current Alzheimer Research: Ten Years on and Beyond
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The initial issue of Current Alzheimer Research (CAR) was first published in 2004, a year marked by the glories of the Athens Summer Olympics as well as the destruction of the Asian Tsunami[1]. Over the last decade, scientific knowledgehas moved rapidly forward across numerous disciplines,marked by the discovery of the potential for water and life on Mars [2,3], the generation of the first induced pluripotent stem cells [4], the creation of the first cell controlled by a synthetic genome [5], and genome editing [6].In the realm of dementia -now, beyond the centennial of the first presentation by Alois Alzheimer on the disease that bears his name [7]–important changes too have occurred in the past decade. Whereas the exact prevalence of dementia remains unknown, it is crystal clear that dementia is a common, devastating and costly condition amongst the elderly. The WHO 2012 Report “Dementia: a public health priority” [8] estimatesthat 35.6 million people suffered with dementia worldwide in 2010. An estimated incidence that is much higher than that approximatedin 2004 (18 million people [9]),and this value has undoubtedly grown still more in 2014.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".