MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W74047589 · doi:10.1385/1-59259-344-5:257

PCR-Detection of Hemophilus paragallinarum, Hemophilus somnus, Mannheimia (Pasteurella) hemolytica, Mannheimia spp., Pasteurella trehalosi, and Pasteurella multocida

2003· article· fr· W74047589 on OpenAlexaff
Henrik Christensen, Magne Bisgaard, Jesper Larsen, John Elmerdahl Olsen

Bibliographic record

VenueHumana Press eBooks · 2003
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicMicrobial infections and disease research
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPasteurella multocidaBiologyPasteurellosisMicrobiologyPasteurellaPasteurellaceaeActinobacillusActinobacillus pleuropneumoniaeSerotypeBacteriaGeneticsHaemophilus influenzaeAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most members of the bacterial family Pasteurellaceae are usually regarded as opportunistic secondary invaders, which under normal conditions might inhabit the mucosal membranes of the upper respiratory and lower genital tracts of mammals and birds ( 1 ). Out of the almost 100 species or species-like taxa that might be isolated from mammals, reptiles, and birds, only Pasteurella multocida, Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae , and Hemophilus paragallinarum are regarded as major pathogens ( 1 , 2 ) while A. suis, H. somnus , and Mannheimia hemolytica are considered as potential animal pathogens. The pathogenic potential is incompletely known for most taxa, probably due to limitations in their classification and identification, and inappropriate detection methods. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumana Press eBooksSame topicMicrobial infections and disease researchFrench-language works237,207