MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239236159 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncq205

Preface

2010· article· en· W4239236159 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. Chen, L. Lemyre, Ruth C. Wilkins, D. Wilkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Chemical, Biological, Radiological-Nuclear, and Explosives (CBRNE) Research and Technology Initiative (CRTI) is part of Canada's response, helping to sharpen the focus of our scientific and emergency response communities on the areas that are the most relevant to today's realities. Many previous and ongoing CRTI projects have greatly strengthened Canada's preparedness for CBRNE events. However; there are additional needs, such as the need to increase the preparedness for dealing with vulnerable population groups, the need for identifying gaps in casualty management and the need for increasing capacity in emergency response. The Workshop on Biological Dosimetry: Increasing Capacity for Emergency Response was held on 19 May 2010, followed by the Workshop on Medical Preparedness for CBRNE Events: National Scan on 20 to 21 May 2010 and the Workshop on Radiological Emergency Preparedness for Children on 1 to 2 June 2010. All three workshops were hosted by CRTI in Ottawa, Canada. The purpose behind these workshops was to enhance communications and networks within the emergency response community, identify the needs and gaps in emergency preparedness and response in CBRNE events and eventually generate a plan for the development of emergency casualty management capabilities with specific emphasis on various population groups.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.357 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation Protection DosimetrySame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207