MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168820566 · doi:10.1126/sageke.2003.44.pe30

Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence

2003· article· en· W2168820566 on OpenAlexaff
Douglas A. Gray

Bibliographic record

VenueScience of Aging Knowledge Environment · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace Science and Extraterrestrial Life
Canadian institutionsOttawa Regional Cancer Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife extensionRegeneration (biology)TelomerePerspective (graphical)GerontologySenescenceCellular senescenceLibrary scienceEngineering ethicsEnvironmental ethicsMedicineEngineeringBiologyPhilosophyArtComputer scienceInternal medicineCell biologyGeneticsPhenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This Perspective summarizes presentations at the 10th Congress of the International Association of Biomedical Gerontology, which was held in Cambridge, England in September 2003. The seminar topics ranged from telomeres to ethics, stem cells to limb regeneration. The meeting organizer, Aubrey de Grey, is a leading proponent of life extension through biological engineering.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience of Aging Knowledge EnvironmentSame topicSpace Science and Extraterrestrial LifeFrench-language works237,207