On vertex-magic and edge-magic total injections of graphs
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drug registries are implemented after the authorization of new products and represent a tool for systematic collection of data aimed at obtaining additional knowledge on appropriateness, effectiveness and safety. The design of registries needs to be coherent with the main objective and a study protocol is required before the implementation. A registry aimed at the appropriateness of drug use should be primarily considered for high cost drugs when there is a risk, either for the patients' safety or for public expenditure, in using the drug outside the approved indications. Since the registry is a condition for the access to drugs, and all users are included, an extremely simplified data collection is required. However, the data should be available at regional level to allow record linkage procedures with other databases for conducting outcome studies. When registries are aimed at acquiring new information on the risk profile, the duration and the regional extension of data collection should be coherent with the expected incidence of events of interest. A great attention should be devoted in preventing that patients are lost to follow-up, since the reasons for being lost are frequently associated with harmful outcomes, such as adverse drug reactions. In a registry focused on effectiveness, the main aim consists in ascertaining the reasons (the prognostic factors), for possible discrepancies between premarketing studies and clinical practice. Taking into account the greater incidence of the expected events, there are fewer reasons for extending data collection to all users, whereas the main attention should focus on quality controls and the ascertainment of confounding factors. Given the relevance of the validity issues, in the set out of a registry it is important to think about ad hoc resources and the adequacy of infrastructures. As for any epidemiological study, an adequate qualification of the researcher/clinician in charge of conducting a registry should be guaranteed, together with independence in data analysis and freedom to publish all findings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it