MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126793166 · doi:10.1155/2006/707296

Where Have all the Antibiotics Gone?

2006· article· en· W2126793166 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRedressAntibioticsIntensive care medicineAntimicrobialMedicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)BiotechnologyBusinessBiologyDiseaseMicrobiologyPolitical scienceLawPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The discovery of antibiotics some 60 years ago was anticipated to herald the end of infectious diseases. However, microbial evolution and genetic jugglery have dispelled this notion; the constant increase in the appearance of resistant strains has not been matched by the introduction of new therapeutic agents. On the contrary, the dire need for novel antibiotics has coincided with a reduction in antibiotic discovery programs in the pharmaceutical industry. As a result, the treatment of microbial diseases has reached a point where many infections are essentially untreatable by the antimicrobial agents currently available. At the present time, numerous initiatives are being undertaken by physicians and by governments in an attempt to redress this situation. In addition, alternative approaches to antibiotics for the treatment of infectious diseases are being explored intensively.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.208 · 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