MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944334955 · doi:10.15353/cjo.73.591

Open Your Eyes

2011· article· en· W2944334955 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cao Aco

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of optometry/CJO. Canadian journal of optometry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Health Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An exciting new consumer advertising campaign to launch this fallWhat led to the open Your eYes campaign?Earlier this year, the team from Ogilvy conducted interviews with CAO and NPEC committee members from coast to coast.Based on the feedback that they received, it was clear that we needed to generate more impact and to assert the role of optometrists:• There is growing concern that other provinces may follow British Columbia in deregulation of dispensing glasses and contact lenses.• The differences between optometrists, opticians and ophthalmologists are not obvious to patients.• The general public remains unaware about the need for regular and ongoing management of eye health.Even with 20/20 vision, 1 in 7 Canadians will develop a serious eye disorder.See an optometrist for a complete exam.opto.ca/openyour eyes Open yOur eyes On Monday September 26 th a new CAO advertising campaign will be launched across Canada to kick off Eye Health Month.Television ads will run on the majority of major networks in English and French markets, including CBC, CTV, Global and Radio-Canada, as well as many specialty cable channels that are popular with our target audience.The campaign is called Open Your Eyes and will run at high media weights until the end of October.

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)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.768

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2300.071

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.315 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of optometry/CJO. Canadian journal of optometrySame topicOphthalmology and Visual Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207