MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226420631 · doi:10.38177/ajast.2022.6205

Robotics in Healthcare

2022· article· en· W4226420631 on OpenAlexaff
Apar Gupta, G.R. Vaisshalli

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal of Applied Science and Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsOceans Limited (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSAFERRoboticsRobotHealth careArtificial intelligenceHealthcare industryMedical roboticsFocus (optics)Patient safetyComputer scienceMedical emergencyMedicineComputer securityPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a long time, robots have been used in the healthcare industry, mostly behind the scenes. In hospitals, the spectrum of robotic applications has significantly increased over the last five years to include helpful applications for doctors, nurses, and patients. In medicine, robots assist by removing routine duties from medical personnel's schedules, allowing them to focus on more important activities, and by making medical treatments safer and less expensive for patients. They can also do precise surgery in small spaces and transport hazardous materials.

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 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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.707
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal of Applied Science and TechnologySame topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207