MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

BEaST: Brain extraction based on nonlocal segmentation technique

2011· article· en· W2131104747 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersMedical Research CouncilUniversity of California, Los AngelesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGenentechU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationNational Institutes of HealthEisaiUniversity of California, San DiegoAlzheimer’s Research UKNational Institute on AgingNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationF. Hoffmann-La RocheElanNovartisMedpaceGlaxoSmithKlineAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativePfizerSynarcAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsPrior probabilityComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)SegmentationSørensen–Dice coefficientArtificial intelligenceNeuroimagingPattern recognition (psychology)DiceMargin (machine learning)Image segmentationMachine learningBayesian probabilityStatisticsMathematicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.624

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it