MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014167817 · doi:10.1097/opx.0b013e3181baaf4e

Density of Ocular Components of the Bovine Eye

2009· article· en· W2014167817 on OpenAlexaff
Xiao Su, Christina Vesco, Jacquelyn Fleming, Vivian Choh

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersGlaucoma Research Foundation
KeywordsCorneaScleraDensitometryStandard deviationMaterials scienceLens (geology)ChoroidOpticsBiomedical engineeringChemistryCiliary bodyAnatomyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)RetinaOphthalmologyChromatographyMathematicsPhysicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Density is essential for acoustic characterization of tissues and provides a basic input for ultrasound backscatter and absorption models. Despite the existence of extensive compilations of acoustic properties, neither unified data on ocular density nor comparisons of the densities between all ocular components can be found. This study was undertaken to determine the mass density of all the ocular components of the bovine eye. METHODS: Liquid components were measured through mass/volume ratio, whereas solid tissues were measured with two different densitometry techniques based on Archimedes Principle. The first method determines the density by measuring dry and wet weight of the tissues. The second method consists of immersing the tissues in sucrose solutions of varying densities and observing their buoyancy. RESULTS: Although the mean densities for all tissues were found to be within 0.02 g/cm by both methods, only the sucrose solution method offered a consistent relative order for all measured ocular components, as well as a considerably smaller standard deviation (a maximum standard deviation of 0.004 g/cm for cornea). The lens was found to be the densest component, followed by the sclera, cornea, choroid, retina, aqueous, and vitreous humors. CONCLUSIONS: The consistent results of the sucrose solution tests suggest that the ocular mass density is a physical property that is more dependent on the compositional and structural characteristics of the tissue and than on population variability.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.358 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations31
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptometry and Vision ScienceSame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207