Bibliographic record
Abstract
“I don’t go around saying how bad they are or interfere with how they do business, I just try and do better than them and that is what I think you should do.” He got us our privileges. However, we were not quite out of the woods. Just before Christmas of 1966, Dr. Samuel Wolfe, our clinic’s medical director, received a summons from the College of Physicians and Surgeons to appear before the Disciplinary Committee charged with unprofessional conduct for unethical advertising. The cause was a pamphlet that the Community Health Association had published entitled, “How to Use the Clinic,” that described the services, hours of operation, and other details. Every member patient would receive a copy of this. One had been lying on the bed of a clinic patient in hospital when it was seen by one of our opponents who took it to the College. Our lawyer applied for an injunction against the College for their attempt to act against the physicians for something done by another party, i.e., the Saskatoon Community Clinic. That injunction has never been answered.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".