Bibliographic record
Abstract
T he Canadian Journal of Plastic Surgery (CJPS) has begun a new and exciting phase in its history.It is now owned by the Canadian Society of Plastic Surgeons, and I am privileged to be the new Editorin-Chief.Over the past several months, the Journal has made changes we hope will be enthusiastically supported by and will benefit the entire Society membership and plastic surgery as a whole.The most obvious change you will all see instantly -our cover is now RED.Red was chosen for its vibrant colour and as a play on words -we want the 'RED JOURNAL' to be READ.This is, in fact, the fundamental principle that will drive all decisions regarding the Journal -it must be read.And to take that further, to be read, we understand it must provide value.As a professional journal, it must educate and inform the profession it serves, and I hope it does this now and for the many years to come.We have undertaken many new initiatives and, judging by the commitment we have received from more than 50 society members so far, there are many great things still to come.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.240 | 0.108 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".