Advances in breath odor research: re-evaluation and newly-arising sciences
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 articles in this special section describe the most recent advances in halitosis research presented at the Ninth International Conference on Breath Odor Research, a joint conference with the XXIV CONBRAPE (Brazilian Congress of Periodontology) held at Bahia Othon Palace Hotel in Salvador, Bahia, Brazil on 25–28 May 2011. It has been almost half a century since Joseph Tonzetich of the Faculty of Dentistry at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada (the first honorable member of the International Society for Breath Odor Research (ISBOR) who died in 2000, and is known as 'the godfather of halitosis research') published his first halitosis paper entitled 'Evaluation of volatile odoriferous components of saliva' in Archives of Oral Biology in 1964 [1]. This was the starting point for breath-odor research, long before ISBOR was established, although research in this area had declined by the time we convened global collaboration in halitosis research.
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 | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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