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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although PowerPoint has become a ubiquitous presentation tool in medical imaging, it does not support the Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) standard. Users must go through a laborious conversion process that includes guessing the appropriate brightness and contrast to convert 16-bit DICOM images into 8-bit formats. A PowerPoint add-in was developed that incorporates features of a DICOM viewer into a presentation. Users can interactively manipulate large series of 16-bit images in stack mode with scroll, crop, zoom, and window width and level functions, as well as sort through images by location or series. Multiple DICOM image series can be placed on a single slide, and one can interactively scroll through stacks of images during a presentation to demonstrate imaging findings. The problem created by the varying contrast and brightness of different projector systems is overcome by interactively adjusting the image window level during presentations. Bone and lung window views can be shown without having to create separate images. Combining DICOM images into stacks as part of a PowerPoint presentation can result in a more effective and higher-quality presentation of medical images.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it