MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007536720 · doi:10.1002/ejlt.200700259

Borage and evening primrose oil

2008· article· en· W2007536720 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Lipid Science and Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvening Primrose OilEvening primrosegamma-Linolenic acidFood scienceChemistryLinoleic acidLinolenic acidBotanyTocopherolFatty acidBiologyPolyunsaturated fatty acidBiochemistryAntioxidantVitamin E

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The paper gives a short overview about the production and composition of borage ( Borago officinalis ) and evening primrose ( Oenothera biennis ) oil considering special aspects of the production as cold‐pressed oil. Both oils are characterized by a remarkable amount of γ‐linolenic acid, which has some nutritional advantages. The fatty acid composition of evening primrose oil is dominated by linoleic acid with about 72% and about 13% γ‐linolenic acid, while borage oil consists of twice the amount of γ‐linolenic acid and only 38% linoleic acid. The amount of saturated fatty acids is higher in borage oil. The tocopherol composition of both oils is dominated by γ‐tocopherol, with borage oil containing twice the amount compared to evening primrose oil.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.451
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.257 · 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