Stereological determination of the volume of the rat hemimandible tissues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rodent incisors are useful models to study the development and behavior of dental and periodontal tissues. Some studies require three-dimensional reconstructions of the tooth but none of the described methods yield actual volumetric data. Unlike the rat lower incisors the hemimandible can be easily isolated and its volume was determined by Cavalieri's geometrical principle. This method associated with point-counting volumetry was used to calculate the volume of the structures found in that bone mainly those related to the lower incisor. For 172 g male rats the mean volume of the hemimandible was 182.7 mm(3), statistically not different from 184.9 mm(3) the mean volume of the same hemimandibles determined by Archimedes' principle. The coefficients of error (CE) of Cavalieri's estimates for the hemimandible, incisor as a whole (the tooth itself, odontogenic region and periodontium) and bone tissue were less than 0.04. For the incisor individual tissues the CEs were usually above 0.05, however their calculated volumes are probably not different from the actual ones. The data for incisors and their periodontal tissues and for bone, because of continuous growth of these structures, are meaningful only for rats of the same gender, strain and weight range.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".