MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206805259 · doi:10.1557/mrs2005.137

2005 MRS Spring Meeting Mixes the Aesthetics and Science of Materials Research

2005· article· en· W4206805259 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMRS Bulletin · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOak Ridge National LaboratoryDivision of Materials ResearchUniversity of California, IrvineUniversity of California, DavisUniversity of California, Los AngelesUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignSamsungUniversität StuttgartMyongji UniversityUniversity of PittsburghUniversity of CambridgeUniversity of California, San DiegoSeoul National UniversityUniversity of TorontoEidgenössische Technische Hochschule ZürichWeizmann Institute of ScienceNorthwestern UniversityUniversity of RochesterNorth Carolina State UniversityUniversity of MinnesotaNational Science FoundationPrinceton UniversityUniversity of WashingtonJohns Hopkins UniversityOhio State UniversityRensselaer Polytechnic InstituteTechnische Universiteit EindhovenSamsung Advanced Institute of TechnologyHarvard UniversityTel Aviv UniversityNational Institutes of HealthGeorgia Institute of TechnologyMcKnight Foundation
KeywordsSpring (device)Engineering physicsAestheticsMaterials sciencePolymer scienceArtEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0830.026

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueMRS BulletinSame topicMachine Learning in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207