MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386099101 · doi:10.1136/bmj.p1946

We need a universally endorsed definition of a pandemic for the Pandemic Accord to be effective

2023· editorial· en· W4386099101 on OpenAlexaff
Noor Shakfeh, Fifa Rahman, Katri Bertram

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2023
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Security and Public Health
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicScope (computer science)NegotiationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Focus (optics)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Computer scienceInfluenza pandemicPolitical scienceMedicineVirologyLawDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)Pathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the Pandemic Accord to be effective, member states must urgently focus negotiations to define its scope, including its definition of “pandemic,” and ensure the definition avoids the pitfalls of past mistakes, argue Noor Shakfeh, Fifa Rahman, and Katri Bertram

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.317 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicGlobal Security and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207