MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000522027 · doi:10.29173/hsi132

Importance of considering methodological variables in rat studies

2013· article· en· W3000522027 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Namrata Joshi

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Science Inquiry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHuman Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconometricsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

She is currently a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of

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)0.555
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.696
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.5550.696
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.012
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.480
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.044 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueHealth Science InquirySame topicHuman Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207