MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231147784 · doi:10.1038/s41374-020-0395-6

Abstracts from USCAP 2020: Neuropathology and Ophthalmic Pathology (1697-1738)

2020· article· en· W4231147784 on OpenAlexaff
Jason L. Hornick, Rhonda K. Yantiss, Laura W. Lamps, Cme Subcommittee, Steven D. Billings, Raja R. Seethala, Ilan Weinreb, David Kaminsky, Zubair Baloch, Daniel J. Brat, Ashley Cimino‐Mathews, James R. Cook, Sarah Dry, William C. Faquin, Yuri Fedoriw, Karen Fritchie, Lakshmi Priya, Kunju Anna, Marie Mulligan, Rish K. Pai, David Papke, Vinita Parkash, Carlos Parra‐Herran, Anil V. Parwani, Fnu Aakash, Mei Lin, Meenakshi Bhattacharjee, Leomar Y. Ballester, Mohammed Alshemeili, David Meyronet, Leonidas Arvanitis, Hsiao‐Wei Chen, Carrie Louie, Massimo Apuzzo, Dongqing Gu, Hooi Yew, Jana Portnow, Benham Badie, Raju Pillai, Patricia Aoun, Milhan Telatar, Michelle Afkhami, Sofia Asioli, Doriana Donatella, Di Nanni, Angelo Corradini, Francesca Ambrosi, Diego Mazzatenta, Matteo Zoli, Marco Faustini‐Fustini, Federica Guaraldi, Federico Roncaroli, Sabrina Bergeron, Bryan Arthurs, Debra-Meghan Sanft, Miguel N. Burnier, Timothy Chao, Danielle Fortuna, Rhonda Kean, D. Craig Hooper, Michelle Nagurney, Mark Curtis, Alessia Cimadamore, Antonio Zizzi, Laura Pepi, Rodolfo Montironi, Marina Scarpelli

Bibliographic record

VenueLaboratory Investigation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuropathologyPathologyOphthalmic pathologyMedicineOphthalmologyNeuro-ophthalmologyDiseaseGlaucoma

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score0.690

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueLaboratory InvestigationSame topicNeurology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207