MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244945660 · doi:10.5210/jbc.v45i1.10831

Editor's Comments

2021· article· en· W4244945660 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Gary W. Schnitz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biocommunication · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedical History and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of TorontoUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsNazismSubject (documents)The HolocaustLibrary scienceClassicsArt historyLawHistoryPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Welcome to the Journal of Biocommunication’s Special Issue 45-1. We have designated this publication as a JBC “Special Issue,” as it is devoted entirely to one topic. Our current Special Issue includes articles and commentaries all related to Eduard Pernkopf’s, Atlas of Topographical and Applied Human Anatomy. Our authors have provided in-depth discussions about the Pernkopf’s atlas’ dark history, the uncertain origin of cadavers used as references for the atlas, and medical crimes of the Third Reich. Seven of the articles are authored by some of the world’s leading historians and authorities on the subject of the Pernkopf atlas and the abuses of Nazi medicine. These authors presented papers at a Holocaust Education Week Symposium that was held on Nov. 10, 2019, at the Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. This landmark Symposium was called, “The Vienna Protocol: Medicine’s Confrontation with Continuing Legacies of its Nazi Past.” The Symposium faculty included Susan Mackinnon, MD, Rabbi Joseph Polak, William E. Seidelman, MD, Sabine Hildebrandt, MD, Philip Berger, MD, Anne Agur, PhD, and Leila Lax, PhD, who also served as the Symposium coordinator and host. Table of Contents image credit: Medical University of Vienna, MUW-AD-003250-5-ABB-81.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.096
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.096
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0170.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1130.065

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of BiocommunicationSame topicMedical History and ResearchFrench-language works237,207