MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133189692 · doi:10.1039/c5cc90113h

Highlights from Faraday discussion 170: Challenges and opportunities of modern mechanochemistry, Montreal, Canada, 2014

2015· article· en· W2133189692 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tomislav Friščić, Stuart L. James, E.V. Boldyreva, Carsten Bolm, William Jones, James Mack, Jonathan W. Steed, Kenneth S. Suslick

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Communications · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicBuilding materials and conservation
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMcGill UniversityCentre in Green Chemistry and Catalysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanochemistryFaraday cageAstrobiologyEngineering physicsNanotechnologyMedia studiesPolitical scienceEngineeringMaterials sciencePhysicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Faraday Discussion Mechanochemistry: From Functional Solids to Single Molecules which took place 21-23 May 2014 in Montreal, Canada, brought together a diversity of academic and industrial researchers, experimentalists and theoreticians, students, as well as experienced researchers, to discuss the changing face of mechanochemistry, an area with a long history and deep connections to manufacturing, that is currently undergoing vigorous renaissance and rapid expansion in a number of areas, including supramolecular chemistry, smart polymers, metal-organic frameworks, pharmaceutical materials, catalytic organic synthesis, as well as mineral and biomass processing and nanoparticle synthesis.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.007
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0100.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.004

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.139 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations53
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical CommunicationsSame topicBuilding materials and conservationFrench-language works237,207