MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080245372

BIAS: Transparent reporting of biomedical image analysis challenges

2020· article· en· W3080245372 on OpenAlexafffund
Lena Maier‐Hein, Annika Reinke

Bibliographic record

VenueVeřejné služby Informačního systému (Masarykiana Brunensis Universitas) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNIH Clinical CenterNational Science FoundationEuropean Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinisterstvo Školství, Mládeže a TělovýchovyCanadian Cancer Society
KeywordsInterpretabilityBenchmarkingChecklistComputer scienceData scienceImage qualitySet (abstract data type)Quality (philosophy)Process (computing)Image (mathematics)Artificial intelligencePsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.315
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.723
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.845

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3150.723
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0050.010
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designNot applicable
DomainReporting
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

Citations129
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueVeřejné služby Informačního systému (Masarykiana Brunensis Universitas)Same topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207