MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Consenso brasileiro ilustrado sobre a terminologia dos descritores e padrões fundamentais da TC de tórax

2010· review· pt· W2031059179 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

VenueJornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia · 2010
Typereview
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this new Brazilian consensus is to update and to continue the standardization of the principal terms and fundamental patterns in chest CT scans in Portuguese. There is a succinct definition of the principal terms used to describe chest CT findings, as well as illustrations of classic examples. The group of authors comprised radiologists specializing in chest radiology and holding membership in the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, as well as pulmonologists having a special interest in diagnostic imaging and holding membership in the Brazilian Thoracic Association.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.297 · 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