MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Kettil Bruun Society for Social and Epidemiological Research on Alcohol

2004· article· en· W2084118830 on OpenAlexaff
Andrée Demers, H.F.L. Garretsen, Robin Room, Ingeborg Rossow, Trygve Ugland

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic relationsEpidemiologyWork (physics)SociologyWorking groupThematic analysisPolitical scienceQualitative researchMedicineSocial scienceEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Kettil Bruun Society for Social and Epidemiological Research on Alcohol (KBS) was established in 1987 and is an independent organization open to all scientists working on problems related to social and epidemiological research on alcohol. The aim of the Society is to promote social and epidemiological research which fosters a comparative understanding of the social aspects of alcohol use and alcohol problems. In line with this the Society also aims at promoting a spirit of international collaboration. The Kettil Bruun Society is based on individual membership and, by 2003, has 197 fully paid-up members, representing 34 different countries over five continents. The main activities include an annual meeting as well as thematic meetings. In these meetings, discussions are emphasized by having precirculated papers and assigned discussants. The KBS also serves as a basis for organizing international collaborative projects. Project meetings or work-shops are often organized around the annual meetings, and the projects tend to run over several years. The Society's primary influence is through the mutual influence of its members on each others' thinking, the work of the projects that KBS sponsors and the influence its members have collectively on the development of the field.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.444
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.546
GPT teacher head0.597
Teacher spread0.050 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207