Bibliographic record
Abstract
Death and dying are never easy subjects to broach, but that hasn't discouraged palliative care physicians at Michigan State University (MSU) — they have launched a new Web site to do just that. The site, Completing a Life (commtechlab .msu.edu/sites/completingalife/audioon/welcome.html), takes visitors on a step-by-step tour through the issues and questions that surround death and dying, and it does it in a surprisingly clear and comforting way. “Completing a Life is all about empowering people to live as fully as they can in life's last stages and in accordance with their own values,” says Dr. Karen Ogle, director of MSU's Palliative Care Program and the site's codeveloper. “Because the product is richly interactive, users can chart their own pathway through the material by choosing the resources that matter to them as individuals.” The site has 3 main sections. The first illustrates techniques to help the patient and his/her family remain active in the decision-making process as death approaches, while the second provides practical information on easing pain and suffering. The final section discusses the issues surrounding attempts to come to terms with death. As well, a “Taking Charge” section provides step-by-step information for dealing with medical planning, with segments on emergencies, prolonging life and organ donation. For instance, when should 911 not be called? The site features high-end graphic materials, musical backgrounds and video commentary. Visitors must use 2 free Web browser plugins, Macromedia Shockwave (www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/) and Quicktime video (www.apple.com/quicktime/download/). A high-speed Internet connection is also recommended.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.448 | 0.494 |
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".