MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002594466 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e3182749f6e

Focal cortical thinning is caused by remote subcortical infarcts

2012· letter· en· W2002594466 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Eric E. Smith, Adrià Arboix

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2012
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and genetic disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNeurologyMedicineThinningNeurosciencePsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this issue of Neurology®, Duering et al.(1) present compelling proof-of-principle evidence that small subcortical infarcts have remote consequences on gray matter volume. Using MRI scans acquired before and after an incident subcortical infarct, they were able to show that the appearance of a new subcortical infarct was associated with cortical thinning in connected brain regions.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicCerebrovascular and genetic disordersFrench-language works237,207