MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466696820 · doi:10.1055/s-0029-1214409

„Ensuring a Society for All” – 21. Weltkongress von Rehabilitation International im August 2008 in Quebec, Kanada

2009· article· de· W2466696820 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marcus Schian, M Schmollinger

Bibliographic record

VenueDie Rehabilitation · 2009
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Practices and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceGynecologyArtHumanitiesMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In vierjährigem Turnus veranstaltet der in New York ansässige Fachverband Rehabilitation International (RI) einen Weltkongress, in dem sich Experten aller Erdteile aus den Bereichen Behindertenpolitik, Wissenschaft sowie Praxis der Rehabilitation und Teilhabeförderung über Erfahrungen, Entwicklungen, Forschungen und Fortschritte austauschen können, die Menschen mit Behinderungen betreffen. Im Vorfeld des Weltkongresses findet stets auch eine Jahres-Delegiertenversammlung (Governing Assembly) statt, die Vertreter von RI-Mitgliedsorganisationen in rund 100 Ländern weltweit zusammenführt, um über aktuelle Herausforderungen und die Strategien für kommende Jahre zu beraten. In diesem Umfeld gibt es zudem eine RI-Vorstands-Sitzung (Executive Committee), und es tagen auch zahlreiche RI-Kommissionen. Veranstaltungsort 2008 war vom 23. bis 27. August die frankokanadisch Provinz-Hauptstadt Quebec, die in diesem Jahr zudem ihr 400-jähriges Bestehen feierte.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.005

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.360 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDie RehabilitationSame topicMedical Practices and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207