2013 European Association Cardiovascular Imaging Research Grants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since its beginning, the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (formerly European Association of Echocardiography) Research Programme has funded eight grants and allowed the awardees to expand their research interests in outstanding centres in the field of echocardiography in Europe outside their home institution (for a full report, see: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;13:47–50). The success of the initiative induced the Board to invest more money and four grants have been funded for the year 2013. The increment of funding with the possibility of higher chances of success increased significantly the applications with the record number of 25. A few changes have been made as regards the application format (which was prepared in a pre-specified format in order to homogenize the detailed description of the project), submission (all documents are now submitted electronically), the way of evaluating the projects by appointment of an independent committee of scientist external to the Board in order to avoid any potential conflict of interest, and the scoring system (20 point overall, 1–5 points for the candidate CV; 1–10 points for the overall project quality, and 1–5 points for the feasibility of the research over a year time span);. The external committee was formed by the following scientists: Otto Smiseth (Oslo, Norway); Erwan Donal (Rennes, France); Mark Monaghan (London, UK); Antonella Moreo (Milan, Italy); Phillippe Pibarot (Quebec, Canada); Gerald Maurer (Wien, Austria); and Jarek Kasprzak, Lodz, Poland).
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 | 0.024 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".