BUILDING FUTURE COHORTS OF RESEARCHERS: RATIONALE AND AIMS OF AN INTERNATIONAL SUMMER SCHOOL ON AGEING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globally, increasing efforts are being undertaken to set up programmes aimed at enhancing size, interdisciplinarity, international focus and quality of new cohorts of researchers in ageing-related issues. Awareness of such developments, as well as of the wide-ranging priorities identified by the FuturAGE “Road Map for European Ageing Research”, prompted a group of researchers from countries with quite different gerontological traditions (Canada, Italy and Sweden) to initiate an “International Summer School on Ageing” (ISSA). This presentation provides an introduction to the rationale and objectives of the ISSA, starting with an overview of existing models for building a community of age-focused researchers. Lessons from different training initiatives are also discussed, including the Summer Program in Aging organised by Canada’s Institute of Aging. Finally, ISSA’s design, implementation and evaluation structure will be illustrated, highlighting the solutions adopted to enhance the capacities of participants for collaborating across disciplines, sectors and geographical areas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.308 | 0.114 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.043 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".