Bibliographic record
Abstract
When considering the effects of disease on nutritional status it is useful to think of the body consisting of lean mass and fat mass. The latter relates to energy status and the former to protein nutritional status. In addition, childhood growth in length/height is to a high degree dependent upon having an adequate protein intake. If insufficient non-protein energy is fed, then protein is used to help meet energy needs. Hence achieving an optimum protein nutritional status also requires receiving sufficient energy. Assessment of protein nutritional status starts with measurement of length/height and weight in relationship to growth standards. Next comes using mid-upper arm parameters in which the measurement of muscle area or circumference is a reflection of protein nutritional status while triceps skin-fold thickness is a measurement of energy status. Serum albumin remains the number one short term parameter reflecting protein nutritional status followed by serum transferrin. Plasma amino acid profiles can be measured but are mostly dependent on recent dietary intake and so are hard to interpret. Classically, nitrogen balance has been used as a reflection of dietary protein intake. While it has been used extensively on a research basis its clinical applicability is limited.
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 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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".