MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388760235 · doi:10.11647/obp.0335.04

4. Models and Simulations

2023· book-chapter· en· W4388760235 on OpenAlex
David Ingram

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Book Publishers · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceOperations researchPerspective (graphical)EmulationAction (physics)Domain (mathematical analysis)Management scienceData scienceArtificial intelligencePsychologyEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modelling and simulation have arisen as a third branch of science alongside theory and experiment, enabling and supporting discovery, insight, prediction and action. The Information Age gave rise to an upsurge in the use of models to represent, rationalize and reason about measured and predicted appearances of the real world. This chapter describes different kinds of model—physical, mathematical, computational—and their use in different domains and for different purposes. Solutions of mathematical model equations that defied analytical method and required huge amounts of mental and manual effort for the calculations made, before the computer, became considerably more straightforward to deal with using computational methods and tools developed and refined in the Information Age. In the examples described, the focus is on pioneers I have been taught by, got to know or collaborated with: John Houghton (1931–2020) on weather and climate modelling, to give a perspective from a non-medical domain; Arthur Guyton (1919–2003) and John Dickinson (1927–2015) on modelling of body systems and clinical physiology; Louis Sheppard on model-based control systems for intensive care, and mathematical models applied to track and predict the course of epidemics and analyze clinical decisions. Other examples are from teams I have been privileged to see firsthand, as a reviewer and advisory board chair of largescale research projects across the European Union. With colleagues in the UK and Canada, I previously published the Mac Series models of clinical physiology with Oxford University Press. I have established a Cloud-based emulation environment to provide access to these working models—created in the first half of my career and thus now archaic in terms of software interface—to accompany their description in one of the chapter’s examples.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.234 · 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