MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2342622855 · doi:10.1113/jp270891

George Ralph Mines (1886–1914): the dawn of cardiac nonlinear dynamics

2016· editorial· en· W2342622855 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Michael R. Guevara, Alvin Shrier, John Orlowski, Leon Glass

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2016
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMcGill UniversityHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsGeorge (robot)Nonlinear systemHistoryArt historyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiac Arrhythmias: Challenges for Diagnosis and Treatment, organized by the authors of this editorial (Fig. 1), was held at McGill University in Montreal to commemorate the centenary of the death of George Ralph Mines (Fig. 2), a Cambridge graduate who at the time of his death, on 7 November 1914 at the age of 28, was the Professor of Physiology at McGill.Inspired by Mines's seminal papers published in 1912-1914, the symposium focused on identifying areas in which basic physiology and theoretical modelling are defining new approaches to clinical cardiac electrophysiology.This special issue contains 11 papers contributed by speakers at this symposium, as well as three other contributed papers and one perspective.Despite his early death, Mines made transformational contributions to cardiac electrophysiology.His research concerning induction of tachycardia and fibrillation provides much of the basis for our current understanding of these phenomena.Mines's papers contain other insights concerning cardiac dynamics that have particular significance in light of subsequent developments in studies of cardiac electro-

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physiology→Same topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias→French-language works237,207→