MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6943542310 · doi:10.1594/pangaea.910063

(Table 2) Monte Carlo end-member simulation results for the dual carbon isotope model

2019· dataset· en· W6943542310 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2019
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101DiafiltrationLiquationDysgeusiaEmperipolesisTriacetinDurvalumab

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grotheer, Hendrik; Meyer, Vera D; Riedel, Torsten; Pfalz, Gregor; Mathieu, Laura; Hefter, Jens; Gentz, Torben; Lantuit, Hugues; Mollenhauer, Gesine; Fritz, Michael (2019): (Table 2) Monte Carlo end-member simulation results for the dual carbon isotope model [dataset]. PANGAEA, https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.910063, In: Grotheer, H et al. (2019): Burial and origin of permafrost derived carbon in the nearshore zone of the southern Canadian Beaufort Sea [dataset publication series]. PANGAEA, https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.910013

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0850.051

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→French-language works237,207→