MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377220609 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1154595

International perspective on military exposure data sources, applications, and opportunities for collaboration

2023· article· en· W4377220609 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Amy Hall, Trish Batchelor, Laura Bogaert, Robert Buckland, Ali B. Cowieson, Michael E. Drew, Kate Harrison, David McBride, Aaron Schneiderman, Kathryn M. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsDepartment of National DefenceVeterans Affairs Canada
FundersU.S. Department of Veterans AffairsGovernment of CanadaU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)DocumentationMilitary personnelWork (physics)Perspective (graphical)Public relationsPolitical scienceEnvironmental healthMedicineBusinessEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Military personnel may be exposed to a range of hazards. The assessment, documentation and reporting of military exposure information are important steps to guide health protection, services, and research to support actively serving members and veterans. In 2021, a Working Group of researchers from veteran and defense administrations across the Five Eyes countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States) was established to examine large military exposure data sources available in each country, their applications, and opportunities to leverage information across administrations and internationally. We provide a brief summary of this work here to highlight some successful examples of data applications and to elicit interest in this evolving area of exposure science.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicHealth, Environment, Cognitive AgingFrench-language works237,207