Advances in Clinical and Basic Science of Coagulation: Illustrated abstracts of the 9th Chapel Hill Symposium on Hemostasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This 9th Symposium on Hemostasis is an international scientific meeting held biannually in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. The meeting is in large measure the result of the close friendship between the late Dr. Harold R. Roberts of UNC Chapel Hill and Dr. Ulla Hedner of Novo Nordisk. When Novo Nordisk was developing the hemophilia therapy that would become NovoSeven, they sponsored a series of meetings to understand the basic biology and clinical applications of factor VIIa. The first meeting in Chapel Hill was held April 4-6, 2002 with Dr. Roberts as the organizer. Over the years, the conference emphasis has expanded from discussions of factor VIIa and tissue factor to additional topics in hemostasis and thrombosis. This year's meeting includes presentations by internationally renowned speakers that discuss the state-of-the-art on an array of important topics, including von Willebrand factor, engineering advances, coagulation and disease, tissue factor biology, therapeutic advances, and basic clotting factor biology. Included in this review article are illustrated abstracts provided by our speakers, which highlight the main conclusions of each invited talk. This will be the first meeting without Dr. Roberts in attendance, yet his commitment to excellent science and his focus on turning science to patient care are pervasively reflected in the presentations by our speakers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.010 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".