Orbital Measurements in the Presence of Epicanthi in Healthy North American Caucasians
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
Anthropometric examination of 1,312 healthy North American Caucasians (654 boys, 658 girls) aged 6-18 years revealed epicanthus in 387 subjects (29.5%, 198 boys and 189 girls). Significantly more epicanthi were minor (232, 59.9%) than major, i.e., moderate or marked (155, 40.1%; SED = 3.5, diff. = 19.8). Only one quarter of major epicanthi were marked, i.e., covered the inner canthus (39, 3% of entire sample population). The prevalence of major epicanthi decreased significantly with age in both sexes. Surface measurements did not confirm the visual illusion that the interocular distance is wide in subjects with epicanthus. The nasal root was on average shallower and the eye fissure shorter and more tilted in subjects with major epicanthus than in those without. Though minor epicanthus in Caucasians is a statistical variation of normal eye lid structure, major epicanthus persisting in adulthood may indicate developmental disturbance. Anthropometry provides accurate measurements of orbital dimensions necessary to identify such developmental disturbances.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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