MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323049011 · doi:10.1038/s41592-023-01812-3

The end game: respecting major sources of population diversity

2023· article· en· W4323049011 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Methods · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalMcGill UniversityMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of California, Los AngelesNational Institutes of HealthHealth CanadaCanada First Research Excellence FundMcGill UniversityFaculty of Medicine, McGill UniversityFondation Brain CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsDiversity (politics)PopulationData scienceScale (ratio)Position (finance)BiologyNeurosciencePsychologyGeographyComputer sciencePolitical scienceSociologyCartographyDemographyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human neuroscience is enjoying burgeoning population data resources: large-scale cohorts with thousands of participant profiles of gene expression, brain scanning and sociodemographic measures. The depth of phenotyping puts us in a better position than ever to fully embrace major sources of population diversity as effects of interest to illuminate mechanisms underlying brain health.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.459
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.345 · 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