MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142882030 · doi:10.1136/bmj.332.7533.103

An unexpected response

2006· article· en· W2142882030 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. Mark Clarfield

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationWifeSubject (documents)Work (physics)Medical educationMedicineMedia studiesPsychologySociologyLibrary scienceEngineeringPolitical scienceLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recent BMJ article exploring the reasons for doctors to consider leaving UK medicine reminded me of a lunchtime conversation in an Edinburgh hospital cafeteria several decades ago. In 1981 my wife, then a senior medical student, and I were on a month-long study leave from our work at McGill University. At lunch one day with various house officers, senior registrars, and junior faculty, the conversation drifted on to the subject of what we would all do “when we grew up.” The fellow from China …

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 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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score0.951

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.402 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicHealthcare Systems and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207