MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Philip Morris International: a New Year’s resolution

2018· article· en· W2793761841 on OpenAlexaff
Crawford Moodie, David Hammond, Linda Bauld

Bibliographic record

VenueTobacco Control · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperGovernment (linguistics)Tobacco controlConventionLawAdvertisingSmoking cessationBusinessPolitical scienceMedicinePublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In January 2018, Philip Morris International (PMI) placed ads in UK newspapers explaining that their New Year’s resolution was ‘to stop selling cigarettes in the UK’ (see figure 1).1 To help achieve this goal, the PMI ads refer to four commitments for 2018: Figure 1 Philip Morris International ads in the UK. 1. Launch a website and campaign to provide smokers with information on quitting and on alternatives to cigarettes 2. Offer to support Local Authority cessation services where smoking rates are highest 3. Seek Government approval to insert, directly into our cigarette packs, information on quitting and on switching 4. Expand the availability of new, alternative products in the UK. While the second commitment is contrary to Article 5.3 obligations of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC),2 and the third prohibited by the Standardised Packaging of Tobacco Products Regulations 2015,3 the latter, at least, could be amended by the UK government. The relevant text, ‘No insert or additional material may be attached to or included with the packaging of a unit packet or container packet of cigarettes’, could be revised with the addition of ‘unless specified by Government (eg, to educate …

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.270 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTobacco ControlSame topicConsumer Attitudes and Food LabelingFrench-language works237,207