MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772565825 · doi:10.1038/nbt.4029

The international MAQC Society launches to enhance reproducibility of high-throughput technologies

2017· article· en· W2772565825 on OpenAlexaff
Leming Shi, Rebecca Kusko, Russell D. Wolfinger, Benjamin Haibe‐Kains, Matthias Fischer, Susanna‐Assunta Sansone, Christopher E. Mason, Cesare Furlanello, Wendell Jones, Baitang Ning, Weida Tong

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Biotechnology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
KeywordsReproducibilityThroughputEmerging technologiesComputer scienceTelecommunicationsChemistryArtificial intelligenceChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaMetaresearchOpen science
Domain: Reproducibility · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
gptMetaresearch
Domain: Reproducibility · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.195
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.167
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1950.167
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0070.011
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.355 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

MetaresearchOpen science

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReproducibility
GenreEmpirical · Commentary

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

Citations38
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueNature BiotechnologySame topicScientific Computing and Data ManagementCategoryMetaresearchFrench-language works237,207