MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404120942 · doi:10.24908/qap.v1i2.18098

2023 Nobel Prize in Physics and Medicine

2024· article· en· W4404120942 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Zhu, Yasmine Abossi

Bibliographic record

VenueQapsule Queen s Undergraduate Health Sciences Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScience, Research, and Medicine
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsEngineering physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2023 Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine was awarded jointly to Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman for their contributions to the development of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19. Dr. Karikó obtained her doctoral degree from the University of Szeged before moving to the United States and obtaining the position of an adjunct professor at the University of Pennsylvania.1 Dr. Weissman obtained an M.D. and a Ph.D. degree at Boston University and subsequently obtained a faculty position at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. The two researchers met during their shared time at the University of Pennsylvania and collaborated in exploring mechanisms in which mRNA can be used to stimulate immunity development in the body.2 By modifying nucleotides in mRNAs, the pair discovered that the subsequent introduction of mRNAs into cells led to reduced inflammatory responses and increased immune protein production. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, most vaccines stimulated immune responses via attenuated viruses, proteins, or viral genetic code-carrying vectors. These vaccines, while effective, required substantial resources to produce the number of cell cultures needed to synthesize adequate supplies of vaccine to combat pandemics, such as COVID-19.3 Contrastingly, mRNA vaccines can be prepared without cell cultures through in vitro transcription and nucleotides can be modified to adapt to mutating pathogens - flexibilities that allowed more than 12 billion COVID-19 vaccines to be produced and administered in less than three years of the start of the pandemic.4,5

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)0.006
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQapsule Queen s Undergraduate Health Sciences JournalSame topicScience, Research, and MedicineFrench-language works237,207