Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On the 51st anniversary of Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics (QRB) and on my 4th year as Editorin-Chief, it is with pleasure that I announce the new open access journal from Cambridge University Press will provide an outlet for exciting new discoveries in the burgeoning field of biophysics.The section called Discovery, which was tested in previous years as part of Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics (QRB), is now upgraded and relaunched as a journal on its own right.The launch of QRB Discovery, which coincided with the annual conference of the Biophysical Society, promises those working in the field a fast, transparent way to publish cutting edge results.The focus for QRB Discovery will be on biological phenomena that can be described and analysed from a molecular angle.Biophysics applies approaches and methods traditionally used in physics and maths to study the living world, from molecules and cells right up to populations of animals and plants.This interdisciplinary approach has a huge number of applications and has the potential to address some of the biggest challenges facing our species and our planet.It is vital that discoveries with the potential to benefit society are published quickly and transparently.The field has been missing a dedicated place to publish ground-breaking results -'discoveries' that point towards an exciting direction, rather than presenting of a traditional comprehensive study.This is the gap QRB Discovery will seek to fill.Authors are encouraged to elaborate on the potential consequences and wider impact of their discoveries.If the research is of high quality and it is a sound result that points in an exciting directioneven if it is speculativewe will publish.This transparency is further extended by publishing open peer review reports.This will, expectantly, promote a more constructive type of review for authors but it will also contribute to the recognition of reviewers.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.010 |
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 it