MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Low-dose phase-based X-ray imaging techniques for in situ soft tissue engineering assessments

2015· article· en· W2210469496 on OpenAlexafffund
Zohreh Izadifar, Ali Honaramooz, Sheldon Wiebe, George Belev, Daniel Chen, Dean Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomaterials · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced X-ray Imaging Techniques
Canadian institutionsCanadian Light Source (Canada)Royal University HospitalUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersGovernment of SaskatchewanWestern Economic Diversification CanadaSaskatchewan Health Research FoundationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Foundation for InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsBiomaterialBiomedical engineeringPhase-contrast imagingMaterials scienceSoft tissueMedical imagingTissue engineeringTomographyPhase contrast microscopyRadiologyMedicineOptics

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations44
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBiomaterialsSame topicAdvanced X-ray Imaging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207