<i>Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics</i>awards Top Reviewer of the Year
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics (HV&I, formerly Human Vaccines) recently started its 8th year of publication. Each month, we publish a mix of high-quality original research and solicited content including timely reviews, commentaries, news, portraits, and much more. HV&I has become well-established in the vaccine community as an important forum for companies, academics, governmental and non-governmental organizations in this field. Our journal’s unique and exclusive focus on vaccines and immunotherapeutics for human use coupled with the rapid turnaround from submission through peer review to acceptance has allowed HV&I to continuously increase its content and progressively improve its standing relative to other journals in the field. Obviously, the successful development of HV&I would not have been possible without the many scientists who have served as peer reviewers for HV&I. We want to take this opportunity to thank all our reviewers for their time and commitment. All peer reviewers of 2011 are listed below. In particular, we are very pleased to recognize Dr. Arístides Aguilar Betancourt (Centre for Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology, Biomedical Research Branch, Vaccines Division, Havana, Cuba) as Top Reviewer 2011 for Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics. On behalf of Landes Bioscience, we want to thank him for his commitment with a special gift. Previous Awardees were Drs. Brian Greenwood (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK), Brian Ward (McGill University, Montreal, Canada), James Tartaglia (Sanofi-Pasteur, Toronto, Canada), Joel Bozue (USAMRIID Bacteriology, Fort Detrick, MD, USA), and Mark Kane (Consultant, Mercer Island, Seattle, WA, USA).Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics (HV&I, formerly Human Vaccines) recently started its 8th year of publication. Each month, we publish a mix of high-quality original research and solicited content including timely reviews, commentaries, news, portraits, and much more. HV&I has become well-established in the vaccine community as an important forum for companies, academics, governmental and non-governmental organizations in this field. Our journal’s unique and exclusive focus on vaccines and immunotherapeutics for human use coupled with the rapid turnaround from submission through peer review to acceptance has allowed HV&I to continuously increase its content and progressively improve its standing relative to other journals in the field. Obviously, the successful development of HV&I would not have been possible without the many scientists who have served as peer reviewers for HV&I. We want to take this opportunity to thank all our reviewers for their time and commitment. All peer reviewers of 2011 are listed below. In particular, we are very pleased to recognize Dr. Arístides Aguilar Betancourt (Centre for Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology, Biomedical Research Branch, Vaccines Division, Havana, Cuba) as Top Reviewer 2011 for Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics. On behalf of Landes Bioscience, we want to thank him for his commitment with a special gift. Previous Awardees were Drs. Brian Greenwood (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK), Brian Ward (McGill University, Montreal, Canada), James Tartaglia (Sanofi-Pasteur, Toronto, Canada), Joel Bozue (USAMRIID Bacteriology, Fort Detrick, MD, USA), and Mark Kane (Consultant, Mercer Island, Seattle, WA, USA).
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".