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
Innovation and progress in radiation oncology depend on discovery and insights realized through research in radiation biology. Radiobiology research has led to fundamental scientific insights, from the discovery of stem/progenitor cells to the definition of signal transduction pathways activated by ionizing radiation that are now recognized as integral to the DNA damage response (DDR). Radiobiological discoveries are guiding clinical trials that test radiation therapy combined with inhibitors of the DDR kinases DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK), ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM), ataxia telangiectasia related (ATR), and immune or cell cycle checkpoint inhibitors. To maintain scientific and clinical relevance, the field of radiation biology must overcome challenges in research workforce, training, and funding. The National Cancer Institute convened a workshop to discuss the role of radiobiology research and radiation biologists in the future scientific enterprise. Here, we review the discussions of current radiation oncology research approaches and areas of scientific focus considered important for rapid progress in radiation sciences and the continued contribution of radiobiology to radiation oncology and the broader biomedical research community.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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