MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantitative comparison of 21 protocols for labeling hippocampal subfields and parahippocampal subregions in in vivo MRI: Towards a harmonized segmentation protocol

2015· article· en· W2165570456 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul A. Yushkevich, Robert Amaral, Jean C. Augustinack, Andrew R. Bender, Jeffrey D. Bernstein, Marina Boccardi, Martina Bocchetta, Alison C. Burggren, Valerie A. Carr, M. Mallar Chakravarty, Gaël Chételat, Ana M. Daugherty, Lila Davachi, Song‐Lin Ding, Arne D. Ekstrom, Mirjam I. Geerlings, Abdul S. Hassan, Yushan Huang, Juan Eugenio Iglesias, Renaud La Joie, Geoffrey A. Kerchner, Karen F. LaRocque, Laura A. Libby, Nikolai Malykhin, Susanne G. Mueller, Rosanna K. Olsen, Daniela J. Palombo, Mansi Parekh, John Pluta, Alison R. Preston, Jens C. Pruessner, Charan Ranganath, Naftali Raz, Margaret L. Schlichting, Dorothée Schoemaker, Sachi Singh, Craig E.L. Stark, Nanthia Suthana, Alexa Tompary, Marta M. Turowski, Koen Van Leemput, Anthony D. Wagner, Lei Wang, Julie L. Winterburn, Laura E.M. Wisse, Michael A. Yassa, Michael Zeineh

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalUniversity of AlbertaMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeCanadian HIV Trials Network, Canadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGE HealthcareNational Institutes of HealthCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institute on Drug AbuseInternationale Stichting Alzheimer OnderzoekNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institute on AgingNorsk SykepleierforbundAssociation France AlzheimerU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche MédicaleAgence Nationale de la RechercheEpilepsy FoundationAmerican Federation for Aging ResearchMcKnight Endowment Fund for NeuroscienceAlzheimer's AssociationNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFondation Plan AlzheimerWeston Brain InstituteMichael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's ResearchU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsHippocampal formationProtocol (science)SegmentationNeuroscienceIn vivoComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePsychologyMedicinePathologyBiology

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.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.347
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.119 · 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

Citations370
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImageSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207