International Psychogeriatrics and the International Psychogeriatric Association: a successful marriage turns silver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is this time again to celebrate another milestone which International Psychogeriatrics has reached. In 2014 the theme is silver, since it is a quarter of a century since the International Psychogeriatric Association (IPA), founded in 1982, and International Psychogeriatrics joined forces in the quest to improve the mental health of older people around the globe. Our journal has matured since coming to life in 1989, growing up under the watchful eyes of a series of dedicated editors to come of age in 2009 (Ames, 2009), and now experiencing maturity, enjoying the 25th wedding anniversary with the IPA. International Psychogeriatrics is proud to be the scientific journal of IPA and strives to publish high quality scientific work in the field of psychogeriatrics with the aim to reflect the global vision and mission of IPA. International Psychogeriatrics will commemorate this happy occasion with exciting content in the 12 issues of 2014 as well as a silver ribbon on the cover.
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 | 0.011 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.025 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
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".