MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231535802 · doi:10.1176/pn.41.16.0036a

Faulty Logic

2006· article· en· W4231535802 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ethan Kass

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric News · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Letters to the EditorFull AccessFaulty LogicEthan Kass, D.O., M.B.A.Ethan Kass, D.O., M.B.A.Published Online:18 Aug 2006https://doi.org/10.1176/pn.41.16.0036aI find it ridiculously funny that the collective wisdom of seven psychiatrists from the United States and Canada is to stop using bags with drug company logos because it offends some people.The idea that our professional integrity and public image are somehow tarnished by carrying a bag with a Pfizer or GSK logo on, as expressed in the letter titled "Bring Your Own Bag" in the April 21 issue, is overblown. (Though I must say something does occur: At APA's 2005 annual meeting, a passerby on the street said to me, "Hey doc, can't you afford a Neiman-Marcus bag?")I imagine some people will buy into the faulty logic that because I have pens and bags with drug names on them, I'm a pawn of the pharmaceutical industry and/or endorse the escalating cost of health care. By that line of thinking, I should stop wearing my San Francisco Giants baseball cap least someone think I endorse anabolic steroid use in sports.To my well-meaning colleagues who can't bring themselves to participate in a free-market society, I suggest giving your bags imprinted with drug company logos to poor school kids. That is what I do.Coral Springs, Fla. ISSUES NewArchived

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric NewsSame topicLogic, Reasoning, and KnowledgeFrench-language works237,207