Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 16-month-old boy with an extensive rash was brought to the emergency department by his mother’s boyfriend. This person had left the household 1.5 months earlier and had not seen the child since his departure; he was shocked on his return to discover an extensive rash on the young boy (Figure 1). Figure 1 An extensive rash on a 16-month-old boy presenting to the emergency department The boyfriend made a number of allegations of neglect against the boy’s mother, including improper nutrition. There was no pain, pruritus or fever. The boy’s medical history revealed occasional diaper rashes. Growth parameters were normal. The boy was pale but happy. Confluent erythematous scaly plaques covered the back, abdomen, axillae and periorbital areas. On the perineum, the rash was clearly demarcated at the diaper edges, beefy red, glistening, desquamating and not showing much scaling. The intertriginous zones were not spared. The legs and arms showed evidence of pink papules and xerosis. The scalp showed extensive golden dry scales with little erythema. Some excoriations exhibited a golden discharge. Both ear canals contained purulent material. Retroauricular and sub-mandibular lymphadenopathy was noted. The remainder of the physical examination was normal. Laboratory investigations revealed a normal albumin level, a hemoglobin concentration of 110 g/L, and normal platelets and white blood cells. A subspecialty consultation revealed the diagnosis.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".