Proportion Indices in the Craniofacial Regions of 284 Healthy North American White Children Between 1 and 5 Years of Age
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 study's aim was to provide the normal range data on 81 anthropometric proportion indices of the craniofacial complex, separately in boys and girls between 1 and 5 years of age, supplementary to the previously published normal proportion values of the North American white population from 6 to 18 years of age. In the first age group, 17 or 18 boys and 18 or 22 girls were measured. In each age group between 2 and 5 years old, 30 boys and 30 or 31 girls were examined. The normal values of the 81 proportion indices were established with the help of 45 measurements (7 cranial, 13 facial, 4 orbital, 12 nasal, 7 labio-oral, and 2 auricular) taken from 287 healthy children. The data on the normal indices were reported in two groups: areal and interareal. The areal proportions are formed by taking measurements from one particular craniofacial region. Proportions indicating the quality of relation of measurements taken from two craniofacial regions were classified as interareal (N = 36). The basic proportions (N = 13) of the areal one show the relation between the measurements influencing the general view of each craniofacial region. The detailed analysis of the proportionality in the individual regions, carried out with the help of the other measurements within the regions, established 36 additional areal proportion indices. The recommended method of examination is to start with the basic proportions, which offers the determination of the most and least disproportionate craniofacial region, followed by a more comprehensive search for other disproportions with the help of the additional areal proportions (N = 36) and interareal proportions (N = 32).
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 | 0.001 | 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 it