MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088336711 · doi:10.1136/jnnp.2010.217802

Lucky accidents do happen

2010· article· en· W2088336711 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vladimir Hachinski

Bibliographic record

VenuePractical Neurology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Research and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lucky accidents do happen. As a first year resident (house staff) in internal medicine at the Montreal General Hospital, I was sent for a month to the investigative unit that relied heavily on radiology. The Quebec province radiologists went on strike, the unit closed and I was reassigned to the neurology service. I had always been intrigued by neurology but I shared the then common belief that neurology was very complicated and offered little therapy. The residents were on rounds with Dr Donald Baxter, the head of neurology. A 57-year-old French Canadian man presented with baffling symptoms. I stood at the end of the …

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0590.025

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.588
Teacher spread0.445 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePractical NeurologySame topicMedical Research and PracticesFrench-language works237,207