Small hepatocellular carcinoma keeping hypodense during dual phase helical CT scan and correlative pathology
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
Rationale and Objectives: To evaluate the dual-phase helical computed tomography (CT) appearance of small hepato- cellular carcinoma (SHCC) with hypodense and to evaluate its correlation with pathology. Materials and Methods: The helical CT dual-phase appearance of 33 lesions with keeping hypodense was retrospectively analyzed, all lesions were confirmed as SHCC by histopathology. CT appearance included border, inner density. Results: In 33 lesions, which were confirmed as SHCC by pathology, keeping hypodense during hepatic arterial phase and portal venous phase, 19 lesions are ill-defined borders and 14 lesions are well-defined borders, 22 lesions show homogenous hypodense and 11 lesions show heterogeneous hypodense in non-enhancing CT scan; however, only 9 lesions are ill-defined borders and the other 24 lesions are well-defined borders with slightly irregular contours, only 9 lesions show homogenous hypodense and the other 24 lesions show heterogenous hypodense with flecks of more hypodense in enhancing CT scan. Conclusion: SHCC with hypodense prefers to have a well-defined border with slightly irregular contour, and flecks of more hypodense in the lesion in dual-phase enhancing helical CT scan.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 it