The external ear: More attention to detail may aid syndrome diagnosis and contribute answers to embryological questions
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
The human pinna has a complex shape and yet the basic components of normal structure are remarkably constant between individuals. It is precocious in its appearance during embryogenesis and it has been subject to many developmental and surgical studies, yet questions remain as to its primary embryogenesis and the causes of its malformations. Unfortunately, the vast majority of clinical reports of syndromes and of individuals with dysmorphic signs provide limited and inadequate description of the external ear. Given the intricate pattern of the pinna, and hence its potential for morphological variation, we think that more attention to the specific description of ear anomalies may lead to a better appreciation of the etiology and embryology of the malformations. Furthermore, in some cases correlation with specific syndromes may provide an aid to diagnosis. Towards those ends this paper reviews some of the controversy concerning the embryology of the pinna, and discusses a number of the better-defined anomalies of the external ear. Although it has been suggested that anomalies of the insertion and orientation of intrinsic muscles of the pinna may be responsible for variations in external ear morphology, we think it likely that in many cases the anomalous insertions may be secondary.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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