Ms. A.M. Taylor, <i>et al</i> reply
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To the Editor: We thank Drs. Ruan and Kaye for their comments1 on our paper2. The topic is important, so further debate over what chronic pain (CP) is helps to refine our thinking. Voting was undertaken using a computerized, button-press system and the responses were therefore accurately recorded. Rather than being surprised at the 9% response rate that CP is a “disease,” we felt that the 31% who responded “none of the above” was more puzzling. On reflection, it may be that the cases presented around what CP actually is could have been stronger or that it was a relatively new concept to ask participants to change their existing opinion that CP is a symptom, to one that embraces pain as a disease, and hence participants were left … Address correspondence to Dr. A.M. Taylor, Centre for Medical Education, Cardiff University, Heath Park Site, Cardiff CF14 4XN, UK. E-mail:TaylorAM{at}cardiff.ac.uk
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 | 0.002 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.026 | 0.026 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
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".