MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2536045866 · doi:10.1186/s12864-016-3085-4

The Third International Genomic Medicine Conference (3rd IGMC, 2015): overall activities and outcome highlights

2016· article· en· W2536045866 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Abu‐Elmagd, Mourad Assidi, Ashraf Dallol, Abdelbaset Buhmeida, Peter Natesan Pushparaj, Kalamegam Gauthaman, Emad A ALhamzi, Jerry W. Shay, Stephen W. Scherer, Ashok Agarwal, Bruce Budowle, Mamdooh Gari, Adeel Chaudhary, Adel Abuzenadah, Mohammed Al‐Qahtani

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Genomics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Rare Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids Foundation
FundersKing Abdulaziz University
KeywordsGenomic medicineExcellenceLibrary scienceGeneral partnershipEngineering ethicsPolitical scienceMedical educationMedicineEngineeringBiologyComputer scienceComputational biologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Third International Genomic Medicine Conference (3 rd IGMC) was organised by the Centre of Excellence in Genomic Medicine Research (CEGMR) at the King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). This conference is a continuation of a series of meetings, which began with the first International Genomic Medicine Conference (1 st IGMC, 2011) followed by the second International Genomic Medicine Conference (2 nd IGMC, 2013). The 3 rd IGMC meeting presented as a timely opportunity to bring scientists from across the world to gather, discuss, and exchange recent advances in the field of genomics and genetics in general as well as practical information on using these new technologies in different basic and clinical applications. The meeting undoubtedly inspired young male and female Saudi researchers, who attended the conference in large numbers, as evidenced by the oversubscribed oral and poster presentations. The conference also witnessed the launch of the first content for npj Genomic Medicine , a high quality new journal was established in partnership by CEGMR with Springer Nature and published as part of the Nature Partner Journal series. Here, we present a brief summary report of the 2-day meeting including highlights from the oral presentations, poster presentations, workshops, poster prize-winners and comments from the distinguished scientists.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.018

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC GenomicsSame topicGenomics and Rare DiseasesFrench-language works237,207