MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W276409341

Urologic oncology: extraordinary opportunities for discovery: highlights from the 2nd annual winter meeting of the society of urologic oncology december 1-2, 2001, bethesda, MD.

2003· article· en· W276409341 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Allan J. Pantuck, Amnon Zisman, Arie S. Belldegrun

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple and Secondary Primary Cancers
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineProstate cancerOncologySession (web analytics)Renal cell carcinomaFamily medicineCancer
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2nd Annual Winter Meeting of the Society of Urologic Oncology (SUO) was held in the Natcher Conference Center of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland on December 1–2, 2001. The SUO was created in 1984 to include members interested in the care of patients with malignant genitourinary disease. The SUO develops educational and research initiatives, one of which is this winter oncology meeting, which is jointly sponsored by the National Cancer Institute and the Society of Urologic Oncology. Physicians, scientists, fellows, and medical and urologic oncologists attended to listen to state-of-the-art lectures presented by experts from all over the United States and Canada. Furthermore, there was a poster session with 50 abstract presentations, many of which were presented by fellows in training, which was a forum for basic research. This meeting was designed to facilitate discussion of important issues among members of the urologic oncology community at the National Institutes of Health. The meeting was broadly organized into three sessions devoted to the major urologic malignancies: transitional cell carcinoma (TCC), kidney cancer, and prostate cancer.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicMultiple and Secondary Primary CancersFrench-language works237,207