MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100736095

© 2007 Canadian Medical Association or its licensors The Left Atrium

2007· article· en· W7100736095 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Vocational Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSadnessSilenceEmbarrassmentDamnationGableDreamAssociation (psychology)Recklessness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Do you know why you’re here?” Truth be told, I thought that was all I did know; that and the fact that in life I had been a physician. I certainly didn’t know where “here ” was, and wasn’t too sure who “I ” was … Can you remember who I was? can you still feel it?1... or when “it ” was. I supposed this was what it felt like to be disori-ented times 3. I nodded at my questioner. “I am here to be judged. ” If this was a dream, it was like no dream I had ever dreamt, for the fear I felt was like no fear I had ever felt. Fear of eternal damnation — whatever that meant. My questioner looked back at me and sighed. “You are here to judge.” In the silence that followed, I be-came aware of a nearby shadow. He hung his head in a gesture of resigna-tion, helpless now to influence what was apparently to follow. I recognized him as a fellow physician I had known in life and realized that I was being asked to judge his behaviour in life sim-ply because I, too, was a physician… Can you find my pain? can you heal it? Then lay your hands upon me now And cast this darkness from my soul.1 My being cast in the role of judge struck me as odd and disappointing. I had not known him particularly well, and I vaguely recalled not liking him very much. I felt profound sadness and believe that I was crying. I had al-ways expected — or rather, I had al-ways hoped — that in the end there would be perfect justice. Damnation of the wicked, salvation of the good, a discerning and just but merciful De-ity. Now it appeared that justice would be imperfectly meted out by a peer — and a not impartial one at that — much as it had been in life. No di-vine comedy; on the contrary, just a human tragedy. I had made a living listening care-fully to what people told me, reading between the lines. It occurred to me now that my response — “I am here to be judged ” — had not been contra-dicted. Was it possible, I wondered, that unlike the poor soul before me I still had a chance to favourably or un-favourably influence my own judgment? This is a test, I thought. Yes, a final test. I must be just but merciful. But, oh my God, what if my judgement is un-justly or unmercifully damning? WouldDO

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8410.732

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.334 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducation and Vocational TrainingFrench-language works237,207