Laminar optical tomography of the hemodynamic response in the lumbar spinal cord of rats
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intrinsic optical imaging (IOI) has emerged as a very powerful tool to assess neuronal function in small animals. Although it has been used extensively in the brain, its application to the spinal cord is rare. The inability of intrinsic optical techniques to resolve different depths and embedded gray matter hampers their capacity to distinguish larger vasculature contributions of hemodynamic signals originating from motoneuron and interneuron activation. Laminar optical tomography (LOT) is a recently-developed method that fills the gap left between IOI and diffuse optical imaging. With distinct source-detector separations, light that propagates deeper into tissues can be distinguished from light originating from the surface, providing depth sensitivity. In this work, LOT is investigated for the first time to image spinal cord activation with simultaneous IOI of the cortex in rats. Such proof of concept provides a powerful imaging modality to study spinal cord activation and disruption after injury.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it