MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6931912946 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.8408282

The EQIPD system - how to ensure research quality in the preclinical neuroscience research setting

2023· article· en· W6931912946 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsInnovation Cluster (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreclinical researchQuality (philosophy)Translational researchCreativityMedical researchPrivate sectorQuality of life (healthcare)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supported through the EU’s Innovative Medicines Initiative, the <strong>E</strong>uropean <strong>Q</strong>uality <strong>I</strong>n <strong>P</strong>reclinical <strong>D</strong>ata consortium has developed a novel preclinical research quality system that •can be applied in both public and private sectors and is free for anyone to use. •Is designed to be suited to boost innovation by ensuring the generation of robust and reliable preclinical data •is lean, effective and not becoming a burden that stifles creativity More information: go-eqipd.org

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)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.007
Science and technology studies0.0080.000
Scholarly communication0.0060.000
Open science0.0080.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.006

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 head0.224
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.173 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207