MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220728146 · doi:10.1111/jmi.13099

Simple automation of SEM‐EDS spectral maps analysis with Python and the edxia framework

2022· article· en· W4220728146 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

VenueJournal of Microscopy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPython (programming language)WorkflowComputer scienceAutomationSimple (philosophy)Cluster analysisSpectral clusteringSoftware engineeringUser FriendlyComputational scienceProgramming languageDatabaseArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a recent article, we described the edxia framework, a user-friendly framework to analyse the microstructure of cementitious materials using SEM-EDS hypermaps. The manual approach presented was shown to be efficient to answer the relevant scientific questions. However, it is limited for batch analysis and (semi-)automated treatments. In this article, we show how the framework can be used to customise the analysis to the problem at hand. We first present some possible extensions, and then we provide a simple example of automatic clustering, using the flexible Python scientific libraries which will allow to define more custom workflows in the future.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.260
Threshold uncertainty score0.890

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.237 · 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