MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327307329 · doi:10.1017/s1551929510001136

Microscopy & Microanalysis 2010

2010· article· en· W2327307329 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy Today · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Materials Characterization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrobeamExhibitionMicroanalysisAttendanceLibrary scienceEngineeringPolitical scienceArt historyChemistryArtMedicineComputer scienceLawNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On August 1–5, 2010, the Microscopy & Microanalysis meeting was held in Portland, Oregon. This annual meeting is sponsored by the Microscopy Society of America and the Microbeam Analysis Society. The meeting was enhanced by participation of the International Metallographic Society and the Microscopical Society of Canada, both of which held their annual meetings in conjunction with M&M. The conference attracted a total of 2,768 attendees from 34 countries, making the meeting the third largest in attendance after Philadelphia in 2000 and Chicago in 2006. The equipment exhibition, always a key element of any M&M meeting, was a great success with 1,007 exhibitor attendees from 108 companies occupying 333 booths, totaling 33,300 square feet (3,094 sq metres).

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.293
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.252 · 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