The Public Health Dimensions of the Global Ecological Integrity Group (GEIG) Conference, Prague, Czech Republic, July 9-16, 2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Global Ecological Integrity Group (GEIG) held its 1 9th annual conference at Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic, July 11-16, 2011. The conference was graciously hosted by Prof. Vladimir Bencko of the Charles University's First Faculty of Medicine in Prague, who, along with Professors Laura Westra and Colin Soskolne of Canada also co -organised the event. John Quinn provided invaluable support to all delegates throughout the conference. Delegates numbered 55, from 15 countries. Kind sponsors included the First Faculty of Medicine of Charles University in Prague which provided magnificent conference facilities as well as refreshments throughout the 5 -day event. The support provided by Sanofi-Pasteur in hosting our welcome reception in the historic Faust's House will go down as GEIG' s best-ever such welcome event. And, not to forget all of the memorable experiences that come with being in one of the worlds great, historic, and intact cities that combine history with modernity; the boat and walking tours were highlights for the delegates, providing keen opportunities for immersion in over 1,000 years of history. This 19th GEIG conference was particularly significant because the topic Human Rights and Duties: Supporting Biological Integrity for Public has been one of the major themes that GEIG has studied and discussed during the course of its 19-year history. However, this theme has been a main focus of our annual conferences only once before, in 1 998, when a World Health Organization (WHO) Workshop at the European Centre for Environment and Health of the WHO in Rome, Italy, was co-organized by Colin Soskolne and Roberto Bertollini, the Centre's then Director. That Workshop included several of the founding members of GEIG. The influence of GEIG, under the leadership of Laura Westra, extended unexpectedly far in that the 1998 WHO Workshop resulted in a 1999 WHO Discussion Document, which turned out to be the most accessed document on the WHO-EURO website for the succeeding three years. It is believed to have had a rather profound advocacy role, and it can be retrieved at the following link: http : //www. colinso skolne . com/documents/WHO- 1 9 99_Discussion_Document . pdf Our latest thinking on these matters as reflected through the Prague conference will be published as the 20th anniversary collection of GEIG' s collective work, sharing the focus on public health from the 1999 WHO Discussion Document. The book is expected to be published by Earthscan (an offprint of Taylor and Francis, U.K.) for launch at the GEIG conference to take place June 18-23, 2012, La Rochelle, France. …
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".