MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126606017 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2008.4649808

Open access to biomedical engineering publications

2008· article· en· W2126606017 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer A. Flexman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenueAcademic communityScientific communicationProfessional associationComputer scienceEngineering ethicsPublic relationsBusinessEngineeringLibrary sciencePolitical scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scientific research is disseminated within the community and to the public in part through journals. Most scientific journals, in turn, protect the manuscript through copyright and recover their costs by charging subscription fees to individuals and institutions. This revenue stream is used to support the management of the journal and, in some cases, professional activities of the sponsoring society such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). For example, the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBS) manages seven academic publications representing the various areas of biomedical engineering. New business models have been proposed to distribute journal articles free of charge, either immediately or after a delay, to enable a greater dissemination of knowledge to both the public and the scientific community. However, publication costs must be recovered and likely at a higher cost to the manuscript authors. While there is little doubt that the foundations of scientific publication will change, the specifics and implications of an open source framework must be discussed.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.177
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.845

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.177
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0150.016
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0220.012
Open science0.0040.016
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4080.265

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.251 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207