MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004543760 · doi:10.1242/dev.040972

An eye on the head: the development and evolution of craniofacial muscles

2011· review· en· W2004543760 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCongenital heart defects research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueInstitut national de la recherche scientifique
KeywordsBiologyCraniofacialVertebrateAnatomyTrunkEvolutionary biologyEvolutionary developmental biologyBiological evolutionProcess (computing)GeneEcologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Skeletal muscles exert diverse functions, enabling both crushing with great force and movement with exquisite precision. A remarkably distinct repertoire of genes and ontological features characterise this tissue, and recent evidence has shown that skeletal muscles of the head, the craniofacial muscles, are evolutionarily, morphologically and molecularly distinct from those of the trunk. Here, we review the molecular basis of craniofacial muscle development and discuss how this process is different to trunk and limb muscle development. Through evolutionary comparisons of primitive chordates (such as amphioxus) and jawless vertebrates (such as lampreys) with jawed vertebrates, we also provide some clues as to how this dichotomy arose.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.282 · 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