MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951167854 · doi:10.1016/j.stemcr.2019.05.015

2018 ISSCR Strategic Planning: Looking to the Future

2019· article· en· W2951167854 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna Wysocka, Janet Rossant

Bibliographic record

VenueStem Cell Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationGairdner FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrategic planningExcellenceBiologyKey (lock)Plan (archaeology)Process (computing)Process managementBusinessPolitical scienceMarketingComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2018, the ISSCR underwent a strategic planning process to identify current priorities and plan for future initiatives. Key recommendations will help the society better serve its members and fulfill its mission of promoting excellence in stem cell science and applications to human health.

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0160.006
Scholarly communication0.0320.011
Open science0.0050.016
Research integrity0.0180.021
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.019

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 head0.276
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStem Cell ReportsSame topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207