MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Letter to the Editor

2004· letter· en· W4256615359 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mamdoh Eskandar

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica · 2004
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWork (physics)ClassicsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dear Sir, I have received your letter dated 18 February 2004, regarding the letter sent to you by Dr Ian Tummon. As Dr Tummon has indicated in his letter, the place and the date of the work are incorrect; he is absolutely right. We started this work when I was a fellow of Dr Tummon in the University of Western Ontario in London, Ontario, Canada, as I was doing my fellowship in reproductive medicine with him, and when I came here to Saudi Arabia, I changed the place of work. I would give my apology to the journal as well as to Dr I. Tummon as I should have informed him about the changes I made to the paper, as I have added and deleted some cases. Please accept my apology, as this work should have been a combined work.

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)0.023
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0170.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.012

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica ScandinavicaSame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207