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
Mucosal healing has emerged as an important outcome measure of treatment in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). It is increasingly incorporated in the outcome measures of clinical trials along with patient reported outcomes and used in clinical practice as a therapeutic target or goal. The exact definition of mucosal healing continues to evolve and several scoring systems have been developed, some of which require further validation. Considerable inter-observer variation may also exist in interpretation of mucosal appearance in IBD. Novel endoscopic techniques demonstrate that even in patients who have achieved mucosal healing by conventional criteria, subtle inflammation may continue to persist. Whether mucosal healing needs to incorporate or reflect histological healing is a topic of intense debate and further studies. In addition, surrogate markers of mucosal healing, such as fecal calprotectin, may serve as a therapeutic target, but there is debate about whether normalization of fecal calprotectin always reflects mucosal healing. Patients with mucosal healing may also continue to have clinical symptoms reflecting visceral hypersensitivity.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it