MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142442969 · doi:10.1093/humrep/17.12.3037

Dispermy--origin of diandric triploidy: Brief Communication

2002· article· en· W2142442969 on OpenAlexafffund
Deborah E. McFadden

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Reproduction · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Trophoblastic Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMeiosisPloidyCentromereBiologyGeneticsChromosomeEvolutionary biologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Triploidy may arise from either digynic or diandric fertilizations. Errors in the second meiotic division account for most digynic triploidy while most studies have found that approximately 2/3 of diandric triploids arise as the result of dispermy and 1/3 as the result of meiotic errors giving rise to diploid sperm. Using molecular markers very close to the centromere, all 14 cases of diandric triploidy were shown to be the result of dispermy with no evidence to support a meiotic error as the origin of diandric triploids.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

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)0.0100.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations102
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman ReproductionSame topicGestational Trophoblastic Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207