Sagittal clefting of the body and other vertebral developmental errors in Canadian Inuit skeletons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine the expression, distribution in the column, and overall frequency of sagittal clefting of the vertebral body in the skeletons of two Canadian Inuit groups. One group, referred to as Thule-Historic, lived along the coast northwest of Hudson Bay, while the other, known as the Sadlermiut, were limited to Southampton Island and Coats Island north of Hudson Bay. The Thule-Historic people are thought to be the ancestors of the present-day Inuit of this region, whereas the much smaller, relatively isolated Sadlermiut became extinct during the winter of 1902-1903. The sagittal clefting results were also compared with those obtained for two other vertebral developmental problems, segmentation error and spina bifida. Sagittal clefting was found to occur with high frequency in the two Inuit series, especially in the region T6-T10. Segmentation errors were found to occur in approximately the same region of the column, while spina bifida produced a completely different pattern, occurring primarily at T11 and S1. The T11 involvement is limited to females, while S1 involvement occurs primarily in males. Sagittal clefting and spina bifida occur in the same individual more frequently than sagittal clefting and segmentation error. Possibly reflecting the smaller population size and isolated location of the Sadlermiut, sagittal clefting was found with greater frequency and intensity in the skeletons of this group than in those of the Thule-Historic Inuit. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2003.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".