MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200050365 · doi:10.1515/cclm-2021-5001

Speakers Abstracts

2021· article· en· W4200050365 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace Science and Extraterrestrial Life
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalMcGill University
FundersTemple University
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Already Kant and Laplace in the 18 th century had a rough, qualitative idea of how stars and planets form. It took, however, until the mid-1990s until the first planets outside of the solar system were detected, so-called exoplanets. Since then, more than 4000 of them were found and confirmed, and even more candidates are being checked currently. It seems as if exoplanets were the most normal thing in the world. In my talk, I will introduce the concept of exoplanets, discuss the requirements for the existence of life on them, and will present modern astrophysical approaches of how to find traces of (simple forms of) life on exoplanets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.542
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.313 · 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