Linked open drug data for pharmaceutical research and development
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is an abundance of information about drugs available on the Web. Data sources range from medicinal chemistry results, over the impact of drugs on gene expression, to the outcomes of drugs in clinical trials. These data are typically not connected together, which reduces the ease with which insights can be gained. Linking Open Drug Data (LODD) is a task force within the World Wide Web Consortium's (W3C) Health Care and Life Sciences Interest Group (HCLS IG). LODD has surveyed publicly available data about drugs, created Linked Data representations of the data sets, and identified interesting scientific and business questions that can be answered once the data sets are connected. The task force provides recommendations for the best practices of exposing data in a Linked Data representation. In this paper, we present past and ongoing work of LODD and discuss the growing importance of Linked Data as a foundation for pharmaceutical R&D data sharing.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it