MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311039066 · doi:10.18438/b81s68

11th European Conference of Medical and Health Libraries

2008· article· en· W4311039066 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Editorial Team

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceHonourPolitical scienceMedical educationMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Welcome to the 11th European Conference of Medical and Health Libraries.
 Towards a new information space: innovations and renovations, 
 Helsinki, Finland, 23rd - 28th June 2008.
 
 The Finnish Medical Library Association, Bibliothecarii Medicinae Fenniae (BMF), in collaboration with the National Library of Health Sciences, has the great honour and joy of inviting you to the 11th EAHIL (European Association for Health Information and Libraries) Conference.
 
 The EAHIL 2008 Helsinki conference offers a high quality scientific program. The proceedings will cover many interesting and current themes, especially the following topics inspired the authors: virtual communities and virtual libraries, evidence-based practice, education and professional development and new technologies and applications. In addition, a number of inspirational continuing education courses will be offered.
 
 Registration deadline for early birds: March 31, 2008 (380 €)
 Registration: April 1, 2008 onwards (430 €)
 Accompanying person: 230 €
 Continuing Education Courses: 60 € - 80 €
 
 Registration: http://www.congreszon.fi/eahil_2008/registration/
 
 Please visit the EAHIL 2008 Helsinki home page http://www.congreszon.fi/eahil_2008/ for information. 
 
 For current discussions about the conference, please visit the EAHIL 2008 Helsinki blog at http://eahil2008.blogspot.com/.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.110
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.200
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence Based Library and Information PracticeSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207