Looking Back, Forging Ahead: 25 Years of FCAA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This year marks the 25th anniversary of Funders Concerned About AIDS' work to mobilize philanthropic leadership, ideas, and resources in the fight against AIDS. We are using this occasion to remember, recommit and reinvigorate. We remember the lives lost to the disease, and the catalytic influence of the philanthropic sector in achieving successes to date. We recommit to our work of convening the sector, providing timely and relevant information to enlighten your grantmaking, and providing the important time and space for funder networking and exploration of collaborative approaches to current challenges. Finally, we will use this quarter century mark to reinvigorate the philanthropic sector -- seeking to re-engage those funders who've moved on from AIDS, as well as reaching out to those working in adjacent areas of health, human rights, and social justice to highlight the important intersections in our work.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 0.015 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".