MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810827131 · doi:10.1139/apnm-2018-0128

Horizon meeting on cardiovascular physiology: Dedicated to Dr. Mike Sharratt

2018· article· en· W2810827131 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Catherine F. Notarius, Robert Boushel, Maureen J. MacDonald, J. Kevin Shoemaker

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaWestern UniversityMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinesiologyHealth scienceSports scienceCardiovascular healthAction (physics)Medical educationGerontologyPsychologyLibrary scienceMedicineEngineering ethicsPhysiologyComputer scienceEngineeringPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This perspective document summarizes discussions held at the Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology Annual Meeting in Winnipeg on October 27, 2017, when an expert panel was assembled to discuss the key questions and challenges for future research in cardiovascular exercise physiology. We were inspired by the example of the late Dr. Mike Sharratt, an accomplished and impactful Professor in the Faculty of Kinesiology at the University of Waterloo. Dr. Sharratt had a unique ability to bring experts together and translate theory into action, with a central goal of optimizing the health benefits of exercise, particularly in the fields of cardiac rehabilitation and aging (University of Waterloo Applied Health Science Department 2016; University of Waterloo Health Science Newsletter, 10-1-2017 ( http://uwaterloo.ca/applied-health-sciences/news/remembering-mike-sharratt )).

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.039

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and MetabolismSame topicCardiovascular and exercise physiologyFrench-language works237,207