MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164689412 · doi:10.1351/pac-rec-09-05-03

Glossary of terms used in biomolecular screening (IUPAC Recommendations 2011)

2011· article· en· W2164689412 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePure and Applied Chemistry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicChemistry and Stereochemistry Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlossaryChemical nomenclatureContext (archaeology)Process (computing)Multidisciplinary approachField (mathematics)Data scienceChemistryManagement scienceComputer scienceSociologyLinguisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biomolecular screening is now a crucial component of the drug discovery process, and this glossary will be of use to practitioners in the field of screening and to those who interact with the screening community. The glossary contains definitions related to various aspects of the screening process such as assay types, data handling, and relevant technologies. Many of the terms used in this discipline are not covered by existing glossaries, and where they are, the definitions are often not appropriate for this field. Where appropriate, this document provides new or modified definitions to better reflect the new context. The field of biomolecular screening is multidisciplinary in nature, and this glossary, containing authoritative definitions, will be useful not only for regular practitioners, but also for those who make use of data generated during the screening process.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.220 · 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