MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414313225 · doi:10.1111/jnc.70230

Embracing Scientific Debate in Brain Metabolism

2025· letter· en· W4414313225 on OpenAlexaff
Jens V. Andersen, Blanca I. Aldana, Lasse K. Bak, Kevin L. Behar, Karin Borges, Anthony Carruthers, Paul Cumming, Amin Derouiche, Carlos Manlio Díaz‐García, Kelly L. Drew, João M. N. Duarte, Gustavo C. Ferreira, Federico Giove, Albert Gjedde, Fahmeed Hyder, Maria S. Ioannou, Oliver Kann, Tibor Kristián, James C. K. Lai, Graeme F. Mason, Ewan C. McNay, Maiken Nedergaard, Thaddeus S. Nowak, Anant B. Patel, Caroline Rae, Timothy A. Ryan, Patrícia Fernanda Schuck, Ian A. Simpson, Susan J. Vannucci, Helle S. Waagepetersen, Gary Yellen, Mary C. McKenna

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurochemistry · 2025
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism and Genetic Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsBrain researchScientific discoveryBrain chemistryEnergy metabolism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brain metabolism is a fascinating and exciting research topic. Many new metabolic features of the brain continue to be unveiled and much remains to be discovered. To truly enable scientific progress, it is imperative that discoveries and theories are continually challenged through scholarly discussion. Here we address an earlier editorial by Bolaños et al. 2025 to underline the importance of embracing and respectfully engaging in scientific debate.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0510.063
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurochemistrySame topicMetabolism and Genetic DisordersFrench-language works237,207