Editorial: Third Peptide Engineering Meeting (PEM‐III) I. Peptides as biomaterials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This issue of Peptide Science is the first of two featuring manuscripts based on lectures presented at the third Peptide Engineering Meeting (PEM-III), held in Boston, Massachusetts, on July 17-18, 2003. PEM is an international workshop addressing structure-based approaches to peptide/protein interactions, and development of peptidic biomaterials, organized jointly by the American, European, and Japanese Peptide Societies. PEM-I was held in Osaka, Japan in 1997, and PEM-II took place in Capri, Italy in 2000. PEM-III was originally scheduled to take place in Toronto at the Research Institute, Hospital for Sick Children, but a change in venue to Boston became necessary due to travel advisories imposed at the time by the SARS outbreak. PEM-III was sponsored by the APS as a Satellite Meeting to the 18 th American Peptide Symposium, which was held in Boston the following week. Representing the three
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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".