MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2359057815 · doi:10.18192/uojm.v6i1.1590

Doctor Jérôme Lejeune’s Gaze at the University of Ottawa

2016· article· fr· W2359057815 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Emanuela Ferretti

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Ottawa Journal of Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicData Analysis and Archiving
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompassionHumanityHumanitiesFaithArtPhilosophyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From January 29th to February 1st, 2015, a group of University of Ottawa undergraduate students and I hosted an exhibit about the life and research of French physician Dr. Jérôme Lejeune, who in 1959 discovered Trisomy 21, the genetic origin of Down syndrome (DS). Considered the father of modern genetics, Dr. Lejeune believed medicine should serve the patient and not the disease. The exhibit focused on Lejeune’s profound humanity and compassion that accompanied his commitment to scientific truth. It also showed how this great scientist maintained an unshakeable adherence to his faith and conscience despite challenges and adversity. Du 29 janvier au 1er février 2015, un groupe d’étudiants au premier cycle universitaire ont organisé une exposition portant sur la vie et les travaux de recherche du médecin français Dr Jérôme Lejeune, qui en 1959 a découvert la trisomie 21, l’origine génétique du syndrome de Down. Dr Lejeune est considéré comme le père de la génétique moderne. Il croyait que la médecine devait se concentrer sur le patient et non seulement sur sa maladie. L’exposition a mis en valeur l’humanité et la compassion du Dr Lejeune en illustrant comment ce grand scientifique a su maintenir sa foi et ses croyances malgré les défis à relever.

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)0.007
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 score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0300.008
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0060.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.008

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Ottawa Journal of MedicineSame topicData Analysis and ArchivingFrench-language works237,207