Quantitative pulmonary imaging using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Measurements of lung function, including spirometry and body plethesmography, are easy to perform and are the current clinical standard for assessing disease severity. However, these lung functional techniques do not adequately explain the observed variability in clinical manifestations of disease and offer little insight into the relationship of lung structure and function. Lung imaging and the image-based assessment of lung disease has matured to the extent that it is common for clinical, epidemiologic and genetic investigation to have a component dedicated to image analysis. There are several exciting imaging modalities currently being used for the non-invasive study of lung anatomy and function. In this review, we will focus on two of them; X-ray computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Following a brief introduction of each method, we detail some of the most recent work being done to characterize smoking-related lung disease and the clinical applications of such knowledge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it