Bibliographic record
Abstract
The symposium Epilepsy at the Cutting Edge, organized by Jean Gotman and FranÅois Dubeau, was for us an extraordinary and unforgettable experience.Seeing so many of our former students and fellows, some of whom came from very far away, and hearing the reminiscences of their experiences at the Montreal Neurological Hospital and Institute (MNH/MNI), followed by accounts of their clinical and scientific achievements, made us very proud.Many of them have taken the original work that they did here and expanded it to higher levels.The only regret that we have is that time did not permit us to speak to all our friends individually and to be brought up to date on their lives and families.We are honored that so many of the participants have agreed to contribute to this supplement, and we will cherish it as a memento of the symposium.The three main themes of the symposium: malformations of cortical development, genetics of idiopathic epilepsies, and investigational and surgical aspects of the epilepsies have been beautifully illustrated in a number of original and imaginative papers.We regret that there was no time at the symposium for two other topics dear to our hearts, on which we have also worked for many years: outcomes of pregnancy in epileptic women and teratogenic effects of anticonvulsant medications; as well as recognition of various neurogenetic syndromes associated with epilepsy, such as the action myoclonus-renal failure syndrome.Between the two of us, we have worked at the Montreal Neurological Hospital and Institute for a total of 95 years, if we include Fred's residency training and Eva's PhD thesis work on genetics of focal epilepsies, as well as her EEG training under Peter Gloor.We are both greatly indebted to our mentors: Francis McNaughton, Preston Robb, Herbert Jasper, Peter Gloor, and Julius and Katherine Metrakos, who stimulated our interest in epilepsy, EEG, and genetics.We were very fortunate to have those giants in the field as our teachers and role models, and later as friends.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.007 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".