Bibliographic record
Abstract
A novel automated method to measure eye misalignment in infants is presented. The method uses estimates of the Hirschberg ratio (HR) and angle Kappa (the angle between the visual and optical axis) for each infant to calculate the angle of eye misalignment. The HR and angle Kappa are estimated automatically from measurements of the direction of the optical axis and the coordinates of the center of the entrance pupil and corneal reflexes in each eye when infants look at a set of images that are presented sequentially on a computer monitor. The HR is determined by the slope of the line that describes the direction of the optical axis as a function of the distance between the center of the entrance pupil and the corneal reflexes. The peak of the distribution of possible angles Kappa during the image presentation determines the value of angle Kappa. Experiments with five infants showed that the 95% limits of agreement between repeated measurements of angle Kappa are ± 0.61 (°). The maximum error in the estimation of eye alignment in orthotropic infants was 0.9 (°) with 95% limits of agreement between repeated measurements of 0.75 (°).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".