Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The International Association of Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions (IAIABC) is an organization of medical directors, administrators, and administrative law judges for workers’ compensation systems. It was founded in 1914, and current membership represents 41 US states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, 9 Canadian provinces, and 3 other governments in a forum for education and discussion regarding the various medical, legal, and administrative issues in workers’ compensation systems. In 2001, the IAIABC formed an Occupational Impairment Rating Guide Committee to study the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) and to suggest revisions specific to workers’ compensation. The committee's goal is to create a supplement to the AMA Guides for jurisdictions to consider for adoption to clarify and/or to replace methodology in the AMA Guides to make impairment rating more uniform and consistent. The IAIABC Guides has been developed to address impairment of the musculoskeletal system and impairment due to chronic pain with the goal of minimizing or eliminating the need for multiple independent medical evaluations and “dueling doctor depositions.” There are no plans to write supplemental guides for impairment of other body systems, and AMA and IAIABC are engaged in active dialog during the development of the AMA Guides, Sixth Edition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.067 | 0.213 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.011 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".