MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317415054 · doi:10.1097/paf.0b013e31822ed56e

DNA Identification in Mass Fatality Incidents

2011· review· en· W2317415054 on OpenAlexaff
Victor W. Weedn, Howard J. Baum

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Forensic Medicine & Pathology · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicForensic and Genetic Research
Canadian institutionsOffice of the Chief Medical Examiner
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Case fatality rateMedical emergencyMedicineBiologyEnvironmental healthEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DNA identification has become an important aspect of mass fatality management as well as in other instances of difficult identification of human remains. Most large mass fatality incidents will require DNA identification. Medical examiners should prepare for such potential eventuality. Whether DNA is tested, in mass fatality incidents, DNA specimens should be obtained from remains as well as from next-of-kin for potential testing. DNA identification is neither as slow nor as expensive relative to the overall fatality management as is commonly assumed. This article sought to provide medical examiners with a framework for DNA identification in mass fatality incidents.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Forensic Medicine & PathologySame topicForensic and Genetic ResearchFrench-language works237,207