Desenvolvimento de amnioscópio óptico 2003
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A gestacao e um processo fisiologico que pode envolver riscos potenciais a saude da mulher e do feto, por este motivo vem preocupando as agencias da area de saude, devido ao indice de mortalidade materno-infantil e as perdas economicas inerentes a esta situacao. Esses riscos podem ser minimizados quando os momentos que precedem ao parto sao acompanhados por especialistas em obstetricia equipados com instrumentacao adequada. Entre os instrumentos utilizados, tem-se o amnioscopio, que avalia e identifica os riscos do feto, mediante a avaliacao do liquido amniotico, cujo uso data desde 1962. Visando a melhoria do amnioscopio, iniciado por Saling, este trabalho teve como objetivo o desenvolvimento de um prototipo optico (amnioscopio optico) para que os profissionais pudessem registrar, documentar e discutir as imagens observadas e os resultados em um mesmo intervalo de tempo. O desenvolvimento do amnioscopio optico 2003 ocorreu no laboratorio de optica do Instituto de Estudos Avancados do Centro Tecnico Aeroespacial – IEAv-CTA e no laboratorio de optica da UNIVAP em 2003. Esta pesquisa inovou a amnioscopia por apresentar um sistema de captacao de imagens que documenta o conteudo e a coloracao do liquido amniotico.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".