Bibliographic record
Abstract
All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Can adian Medical Association. E506 CMAJ, June 14, 2011, 183(9) © 2011 Canadian Medical Association or its licensors Typically, when choosing antimicrobialtherapy for a common infectious disease,clinicians have current information regarding the local level of antibiotic resistance and are able to start therapy empirically while awaiting the results of culture. Infections with Helicobacter pylori are an exception to this rule, in that local antimicrobial resistance patterns are generally unknown, and clinicians must there-fore rely entirely on empiric anti microbial ther-apy. The most widely recommended anti–H. pylori regimen has been a combination of a pro-ton pump inhibitor and two of amoxicillin, clar-ithromycin, and metronidazole or tinidazole (known as “legacy triple therapy”). Initially, this
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 | 0.004 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.023 | 0.024 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.070 | 0.034 |
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".