Use of chromametry and digital photography for objective measurement of skin color in clinically normal dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether skin erythema in clinically normal dogs can be quantified by use of chromametry and image analysis of digital photographs. ANIMALS: 9 German Shepherd Dogs and 10 mixed-breed dogs. PROCEDURE: Hair was clipped at 7 sites on the body. Skin erythema was evaluated at the axillary region, right and left lateral aspect of thorax, right and left loin area (ie, part of the back between the thorax and pelvis), right and left groin area (ie, the junctional region between the abdomen and thigh), metatarsal digital pad, and on the nose. Replicate measurements were done by use of chromametry and image analysis of digital photographs, using erythema values in accordance with the Committee International d'Eclairage (CIE)-Lab color system. RESULTS: Repeatability was high for both techniques. Within-dog variation was lower than between-dog variation. Between-dog variation was high for both groups of dogs. Interregional variation was significant in German Shepherd Dogs and mixed-breed dogs. Erythema values revealed symmetry between the right and left lateral aspects of the thorax and loin and groin areas. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Precise objective methods are available for skin erythema quantification. Chromametric and photographic erythema values had a high within-dog reproducibility. Between-dog variability was high for German Shepherd Dogs and mixed-breed dogs as was regional variation, indicating differences in color among dogs.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".