MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135164613 · doi:10.2310/7070.2004.03075

High-Resolution X-Ray Computed Tomographic Scanning of the Human Stapes Footplate

2004· article· en· W2135164613 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Abdulrahman Hagr, W. Robert J. Funnell, Anthony Zeitouni, Jamie M. Rappaport

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Otolaryngology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFootplateStapesOval windowMedicineCadaverComputed tomographicOrientation (vector space)Computed tomographyAnatomyMiddle earRadiologyPhysicsGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The mechanical behaviour of the footplate and its annular ligament depends critically on their shape and orientation in the oval window, but accurate measurements have been difficult to make owing to their small size. Our aims are to visualize the footplate at high resolution and understand its dynamics. METHODS: The human cadaver stapes footplate was dissected, and very high-resolution x-ray computed tomographic (CT) scans, with voxel sizes from 4 to 8 pm, were performed. Locally developed software was used to reconstruct the images. RESULTS: The data permit us to explore minor details of shape and orientation. The footplate looks like a footprint, and the annular ligament has variable thickness, with a cleft (groove) in its anterior attachment to the oval window. The CT data also permit us to create a three-dimensional finite-element model that can simulate footplate motion. CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained lead to further understanding of the mechanical behaviour of the footplate and the annular ligament.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of OtolaryngologySame topicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesFrench-language works237,207