MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7018292875

Continuing a long tradition: the Canadian Journal of Surgery at 60

2017· article· en· W7018292875 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Research and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingOrder (exchange)Medical journalMEDLINE
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As 2017 marks the 60th anniversary of the Canadian Journal of Surgery, its editors in chief take a look back at the history leading to the creation of the journal and at how CJS maintains its original partnerships in order to continue its mission. Organized surgery has existed in Canada for more than 3 centuries. The CJS is the longest surviving of more than 20 journals reporting surgical endeavours. The editors rededicate its mission to the highest standard possible.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
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 score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.495

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0260.015
Scholarly communication0.0230.008
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0140.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.011

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.248 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicMedical Research and PracticesFrench-language works237,207