MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2066749771 · doi:10.1002/jbmr.141

Guidelines for assessment of bone microstructure in rodents using micro–computed tomography

2010· review· en· W2066749771 on OpenAlexaff
Mary Bouxsein, Steven K. Boyd, Bernd Christiansen, Robert E. Guldberg, Karl J. Jepsen, Ralph Müller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminologyComputer scienceSegmentationVoxelConsistency (knowledge bases)Image processingMedical physicsSet (abstract data type)Artificial intelligenceData miningImage (mathematics)Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0100.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0070.002
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.017

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 head0.290
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4,462
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research→Same topicBone health and osteoporosis research→French-language works237,207→