Research Output and Publications Impact of Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research Chandigarh (1999-2008)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This paper attempts to analyze the research activities of the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh as reflected in its 10 years cumulative (1999-2008) publications output covered in Scopus International multidisciplinary bibliographical database. The present study analyses the broad characteristics of 4,771 research papers published by the faculty members of PGIMER, Chandigarh by focusing on its publication growth characteristics, format and media of communication, research impact and quality, patterns of research collaboration, broad and narrow areas of research focus and characteristics of its high cited papers. How to cite this article Kumar R, Gupta BM, Thakur JS, Sharma RK, Baidwan K, Goyal AB. Research Output and Publications Impact of Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research Chandigarh (1999-2008). J Postgrad Med Edu Res 2012;46(3):129-137.
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 | 0.007 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.034 | 0.068 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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.
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".