A resected case of mediastinal liposarcoma with reconstruction of chest wall.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
胸骨切除・再建を要した前縦隔脂肪肉腫の一手術例を経験したので報告する.症例は79歳男性で, 集団検診において, 右肺門部の異常陰影を指摘され, 精査加療目的で紹介入院した.良性縦隔腫瘍を疑い手術を行ったが, 術中所見にて前胸壁に浸潤を認めたため, 縦隔腫瘍摘除術並びに胸骨・肋骨合併切除を行った.胸壁再建にはMarlexmeshでサンドイッチしたレジン板 (methyl methacrylate resin) を用いた.術後経過は良好であったが, 術11ヵ月後に多発転移, 局所再発のため死亡した.脂肪肉腫は, 縦隔に発生することは稀であるため, 文献的考察を加えて報告する.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".