MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955310143 · doi:10.21037/aob.2019.06.06

Prof. Heyu Ni: it’s important for a supervisor to find the strengths and weaknesses of each trainee

2019· article· en· W2955310143 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Constance Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Blood · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood groups and transfusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnnalsPresentation (obstetrics)Strengths and weaknessesSection (typography)Library scienceSupervisorCenter (category theory)Medical educationMedicinePsychologyPolitical scienceHistoryComputer scienceChemistryClassicsSurgerySocial psychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On May 14th, 2019, the Guangzhou Blood Center and the editorial office of Annals of Blood ( AOB ) successfully held a symposium in Guangzhou, aiming to provide a platform for AOB Section Editors for academic communication and discussion on AOB ’s annual progress and future development. During the symposium, Prof. Heyu Ni ( Figure 1 ) from the University of Toronto gave an excellent presentation on the topic “Platelets and Platelet Immunology” as a distinguished speaker. After his presentation, the editorial office conducted a brief interview with Prof. Ni.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of BloodSame topicBlood groups and transfusionFrench-language works237,207