MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W9052664

Software Engineering Research in the Bazaar

2001· article· en· W9052664 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOtolaryngologic Clinics of North America · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware engineeringComputer scienceArchitectureSoftware architectureBazaarResource-oriented architectureServerReference architectureSoftware systemSoftwareSoftware evolutionWorld Wide WebOperating systemComponent-based software engineeringSoftware constructionHistoryArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As our ability to treat laryngeal cancer and prolong the lives of our patients improves, we must place increasing importance on maintaining the best voice possible in every case. Treatment options for laryngeal cancer continue to expand, and it is important that otolaryngologists stay well informed; not only concerning the local control and disease-free survival associated with each new treatment, but also the expected voice result. This article describes the voice and speech outcomes that are associated with various treatments for laryngeal cancer. In addition, comparisons of the expected voice results for different therapeutic modalities are examined.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.261 · 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