AIDS vaccine research today: A deeper partnership between countries.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When attended the international AIDS conference in Italy in 1989 said Dr. Edward Mbidde director of the Uganda Virus Research Institute in Entebbe I heard about AIDS vaccines and thought Each of the rich countries is going to develop its own vaccine. It will be impossible for Africa to do anything because we do not have the money or the capacity. That changed significantly in the 1990s with the advent of new north-south research collaborations many of them connected with the exploding AIDS epidemic in Africa and Southeast Asia and the urgent need to better understand the diseases epidemiology and the impact of prevention methods such as condom use and treatment of sexually transmitted infections. Some the best known examples were the studies of sex workers in Nairobi and of the population of the Rakai District in Uganda involving national and external researchers from Canadian British and American academic institutions. (excerpt)
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 | 0.034 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.008 |
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".