Summary of epidemiological data regarding MS in Canada <i>circa</i> 2000–2010.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>The value for <i>P</i>(<i>H+</i>) was provided by D. Sadovnick, was based on 400 Canadian controls, and the rate was confirmed in a large transplant database (<i>personal communication</i>). The <i>F</i>:<i>M</i> sex-ratio in the general population of Canada was taken from the 2010 Canadian census. Recurrence risks for monozygotic (<i>MZ</i>) twins, dizygotic (<i>DZ</i>) twins, and siblings (<i>S</i>) were taken from the study of Willer et al. [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0246157#pone.0246157.ref029" target="_blank">29</a>]. The other summary data was taken from <i><a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0246157#pone.0246157.t003" target="_blank">Table 3</a></i>, and/or from the study of Willer et al. [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0246157#pone.0246157.ref029" target="_blank">29</a>]. The <i>F</i>:<i>M</i> sex-ratio among Canadian MS patients at each of the 5-year time-periods (1941–1945 & 1976–1980) was taken from the study of Orton et al. [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0246157#pone.0246157.ref056" target="_blank">56</a>].</p>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.463 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".