MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230174440 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100035289

INFORMATION FOR AUTHORS SUBMISSION PROCESS

2013· article· fr· W4230174440 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Nuprep ClavisTM, MyoguideTM Chalgren, Inoject, Andre Douen, W.F. Head, John M. Findlay, Juliette Hukin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDiverse Specialized Academic Research
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Health Authority
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsProcess (computing)Action (physics)Computer scienceContent (measure theory)MedicineInformation retrievalMedical physicsProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Articles with structured abstracts should be submitted under conventional headings of introduction, methods and materials, results, discussion, but other headings will be considered if more suitable.The SI system (systeme international d'unites) should be used in reporting all laboratory data, even if originally reported in another system. References• References should be numbered in the order of their citation in the text.Those cited only in tables and legends for illustrations are numbered according to the sequence established by the first identification in the text of a particular table or illustration.• Titles of journals should be abbreviated according to the style used in Index Medicus.• List all authors when there are six or fewer; for seven or more, list only the first three and add "et al".• Provide the full title, year of publication, volume number and inclusive pagination for journal articles.

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 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)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.326
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.326
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0120.010
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0150.007
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.7990.640

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.226 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicDiverse Specialized Academic ResearchFrench-language works237,207