MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333356232 · doi:10.1166/jbns.2009.1014

The Unither Conference—Recent Advances in Nanomedical Structures and Devices

2009· article· en· W2333356232 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Raj Bawa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bionanoscience · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiotechnology and Related Fields
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceNanotechnologyEngineering physicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New paradigms are shrinking our world and a classic technological revolution in medicine is unfolding. The agents of this revolution are microscopically small, products of a relatively nascent interdisciplinary field known as nanomedicine—the application of nanotechnology to healthcare. Nanomedicine, with all its excitement and expectation, is already influencing the pharmaceutical industry, especially in the design, formulation and delivery of therapeutics. Based on this broad theme, the 2nd Annual Unither Nanomedical and Telemedical Technology Conference was held in Orford, Quebec, Canada from February 24–27, 2009. United Therapeutics Corporation (www.unither.com/ UnitherHome.aspx), a biotechnology company headquartered in Silver Spring, Maryland, USA, sponsored this conference. The company focuses on the development and commercialization of unique products that address the unmet medical needs of patients with chronic and life-threatening cardiovascular disease, various infectious diseases and certain cancers. Martine Rothblatt, Ph.D., J.D. (Chairman and CEO of United Therapeutics Corporation) and Nobel Laureate Baruch S. Blumberg, M.D., Ph.D. (Distinguished Scientist at NASA Ames Research Center, California, US), chaired the conference. This year’s conference highlighted numerous cutting-edge presentations broken up into various sessions that focused on innovations in nanomedicine, telemedicine, and the applications of nanotechnology to the pharmaceutical, device and biotechnology industries. Approximately hundred researchers, engineers, physicians, ethicists, lawyers, business professionals, policy makers and venture capitalists were in attendance.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.010

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.273 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of BionanoscienceSame topicBiotechnology and Related FieldsFrench-language works237,207