Symptom Perception during Acute Bronchoconstriction
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
The hypothesis underlying the present study was that some of the variability in symptom intensity seen during acute bronchoconstriction may result from varying intensities of several stimuli yielding several sensations that can be identified by specific descriptive expressions (symptoms). A total of 232 subjects inhaled methacholine in doubling concentrations to a 20% decrease in FEV(1), or 64 mg/ml. The study identified the prevalence of dyspnea, nonspecific discomfort associated with the act of breathing, and 10 specific symptom expressions. Each symptom intensity was rated in Borg scale units. The contribution of the specific symptoms to the intensity of dyspnea is illustrated in the following equation (r = 0. 84): Dyspnea = 0.44 + 0.19 Difficult breathing + 0.41 Chest tightness + 0.20 Breathlessness + 0.14 Labored breathing + 0.11 Chest pain. Dyspnea was more intense with broncho-constriction, baseline pulmonary impairment, weight, and sex (being female). Dyspnea was less intense with age (being older) and as airway responsiveness to methacholine increased (p < 0.05 for all factors). Chest tightness and chest pain were at polar extremes on the discrimination scale, i.e., easily discriminated; chest tightness, difficult and labored breathing were not easily discriminated.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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