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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Folyóirat-referátumok. Kardiológia \nPreferenciák és választási \nlehetőségek a pitvarfibrilláló \nbetegek stroke-prevenciójában \n(Values and preferences of \nphysicians and patients with \nnonvalvular atrial fibrillation who \nreceive oral anticoagulation therapy \nfor stroke prevention) \nAndrade JG, \nKrahn AD, Skanes AC, et al. \n(Department of Medicine, \nMontreal Heart Institute, \nUniversité de Montréal, \nMontreal, Quebec, Kanada; e-mail: \nJason.guy.andrade@umontreal.ca): \nCan J \nCardiol. \n2016; \n32: 747–753. | Pulmonológia \nTartós hatású hörgőtágítók \negyüttadása COPD-ben és \na cardiovascularis mellékhatások \nveszélye (Concurrent use of \nlong-acting bronchodilators in \nCOPD and the risk of adverse \ncardiovascular events) \nSuissa S, Dell’ \nAniello S, Ernst P. \n(Centre for Clinical \nEpidemiology, Jewish General \nHospital, 3755 Côte Ste-Catherine, \nH-461, Montréal, Québec, \nKanada H3T 1E2; \ne-mail: samy.suissa@mcgill.ca): \nEur Respir J. \n 2017; 49: 1602245. | Sportorvostan \nFizikai aktivitás mindenkinek – \nrandom, csoportos próbálkozás \n(The phyisical activity 4 everyone \ncluster randomized trial: \n2-year \noutcomes of a school physical \nactivity intervention among \nadolescents \n) Sutherland RL, \nCampbell EM, Lubans DR, et al. \n(Hunter New England Population \nHealth, Locked Bag No. 10, \nWallsend, New South Wales 2287, \nAusztrália; e-mail: \nrachel.sutherland@hnehealth.nsw.gov. \nau): \nAm J Prev Med. \n 2016; 5: \n195–205.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.009 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it