Standard terminology for phenotypic variations: The Elements of Morphology project, its current progress, and future directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2005, the authors of this article formed an international working group to develop standardized definitions and terms to describe the physical variations used in human phenotypic analyses. This project, which came to be known as the Elements of Morphology, resulted in six articles proposing consensus definitions for almost 400 phenotypic variations of the head and face; periorbital region; ear, nose, and philtrum; mouth and lips; and hands and feet. Every variation was accompanied by a representative figure depicting the feature. The articles were published in the January 2009 issue of the American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A and are available for free access on both the Journal's Web page and a National Institutes of Health-based site. The publication of the Elements' definitions has spawned an ongoing dialogue about the proposed terms to describe the phenotype. The working group considered the six articles as only the first step in the process, and four more articles on proposed terminology for the trunk, genital region, skin, and remainder of the limb terms are in preparation. The secondary outcome of the Elements project is the provision of a working methodology for the establishment of standardized terminology and definitions for phenotype analysis in general.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".