MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN MAMMOGRAPHY

2008· article· en· W2079043952 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMammographyMedical physicsBreast cancerMedicineDigital mammographyRadiation exposureCancerNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The art, science, and technology of mammography have developed steadily over the past 35 y. Mammography is a central tool for diagnosis of symptoms of breast cancer. In addition, periodic screening of asymptomatic women in certain age groups has been clearly demonstrated to contribute to reduction of mortality from breast cancer. Technical improvements have allowed the examination to be carried out at substantially lower radiation dose than was necessary to obtain a good image in the 1970's, while at the same time providing greatly improved contrast, spatial resolution, dynamic range and tissue coverage. Digital mammography overcomes many of the technical limitations inherent in screen-film mammography and has been shown to offer increased accuracy for women under 50 and those with dense breasts. The radiation risk associated with mammography cannot be ignored, however, modern analysis suggests that it is very low, especially compared to the benefits from the exam. Nevertheless, imaging should be conducted with careful attention to efficient use of the radiation. New techniques, currently under development and evaluation, promise to add further to the value of mammography.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.338

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.273 · 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