MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236112657 · doi:10.1007/978-1-59259-371-2

Neuroscience in Medicine

2003· book· en· W4236112657 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Anda Cornea, Patricia A. Cleary, David Smith, Steven St, John P. John

Bibliographic record

VenueHumana Press eBooks · 2003
Typebook
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesSchool of Medicine, University of MarylandYerkes National Primate Research Center, Emory UniversityGeorgetown UniversityClaude Pepper Older Americans Independence Center, Wake Forest School of MedicineUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignNational Institutes of HealthHealth Science Center, University of TennesseeWake Forest UniversityUniversität HeidelbergReed CollegeBrown UniversityVirginia Commonwealth UniversityState University of New York Upstate Medical UniversityNorth Carolina State UniversityState University of New YorkFeinberg School of MedicineOregon National Primate Research CenterSyracuse UniversityU.S. Department of Veterans AffairsUniversity of TorontoCase Western Reserve UniversityEmory UniversityNorthwestern UniversityFlorida State UniversityMcKnight Foundation
KeywordsNeurosciencePsychologyCognitive scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The contributors herein have carefully checked to ensure that the drug selections and dosages set forth in this text are accurate and in accord with the standards accepted at the time of publication.Notwithstanding, as new research, changes in government regulations, and knowledge from clinical experience relating to drug therapy and drug reactions constantly occurs, the reader is advised to check the product information provided by the manufacturer of each drug for any change in dosages or for additional warnings and contraindications.This is of utmost importance when the recommended drug herein is a new or infrequently used drug.It is the responsibility of the treating physician to determine dosages and treatment strategies for individual patients.Further it is the responsibility of the health care provider to ascertain the Food and Drug Administration status of each drug or device used in their clinical practice.The publisher, editors, and authors are not responsible for errors or omissions or for any consequences from the application of the information presented in this book and make no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the contents in this publication.All authored papers, comments, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations are those of the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.034

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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.166 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations19
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumana Press eBooksSame topicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive FunctionFrench-language works237,207