MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307229306 · doi:10.1111/ajt.17211

Humans versus machines: Who learns faster? Editorial regarding: “Machine learning-supported interpretation of kidney graft elementary lesions in combination with clinical data”

2022· editorial· en· W4307229306 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Mengel

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Transplantation · 2022
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDemographicsBiopsyKidney transplantPathologyArtificial intelligenceInternal medicineKidneyUrologyKidney transplantationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study by Labriffe et al (page 2821) offers an innovative approach, supported by artificial intelligence, to integrate histological and clinical information.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.004
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0220.032
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.010

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of TransplantationSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207