MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2202288413

Debunking aids myths

2010· article· en· W2202288413 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Graham Lindegger

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHIV/AIDS Impact and Responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellenceGovernment (linguistics)Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)PandemicGender studiesPolitical scienceMedicineHistorySociologyFamily medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Law
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I read this remarkable book in the time between the soccer World Cup in July 2010 and the public sector strike in August 2010. These two events seemed to represent a synopsis of South Africa at present, capable on the one hand of world class delivery and excellence, and on the other hand complete lack of care and interest in the wellbeing of children and the sick. This also describes the history of the HIV/AIDS pandemic in South Africa. On the one hand, South African scientists have made an extraordinary contribution to HIV/AIDS. The remarkable microbicide breakthrough was announced at the International AIDS Conference recently; the first clinical trials of a South African HIV vaccine are about to start; and last year a group of South Africans was invited to Canada to help establish the Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative, because of the great success of the South African equivalent. These events point to the extraordinary role of South Africans in the pioneering work on HIV/AIDS. But on the other hand, South Africa has been the polecat of the world because of the government’s attitude to and stand on the treatment of HIV/AIDS. Sadly this book is about the shamefulness of South Africa in the HIV pandemic, rather than its successes. But just like apartheid atrocities, this is a story which must be told and the abuses exposed. This book does a remarkable job of the latter. The introductory chapter describes the book as giving an account of the “madness, sheer weirdness and despair of a decade with Mbeki and Tshabalala-Msimang” (px). It does this impressively.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.019
Scholarly communication0.0100.013
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0080.029
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.006

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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicHIV/AIDS Impact and ResponsesFrench-language works237,207