Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 40-year-old laborer was digging near the foundation of a house when he suddenly experienced a sensation of warmth that involved the proximal phalanx of the right index finger. He immediately struck the affected area, and as he removed his work gloves, a patch of black fur (diameter, 1 cm) fell from the right glove to the ground. During the next 20 min, he developed a stinging sensation similar to that which he has experienced after receiving a mosquito bite. He continued to work despite having local throbbing and burning. In the evening of the same day, he experienced chills and thought that he had a fever, although he did not take his temperature. During the ensuing 24 h, the appearance of the site of the local injury changed to that of a small bullous lesion with a purpuric base and surrounding erythema, with generalized edema and erythema that involved the skin overlying the carpal-metacarpal joint. The man also noted an erythematous patch on the dorsum of the right hand. He returned to work, but he left prematurely when a red streak developed on the dorsum of the hand. Evaluation done at our emergency department revealed that the neurovascular status of the right upper extremity was intact. Painful epitrochlear and axillary lymphadenopathy was present ipsilaterally. Laboratory investigations were not performed, and the patient was empirically treated for a presumed skin and soft tissue infection with use of iv cefazolin, 2 g given once per day, and oral probenecid, 1 g (administered at the time of the cefazolin infusion). Figure 1 demonstrates the appearance of the lesion 48 h after initiation of antimicrobial therapy. At this time, nonviable tissue was debrided from the site of the injury. The patient completed parenteral antibiotic therapy of 4 days' duration and was switched to oral cephalexin (500 mg q.i.d.) to complete an additional 10 days of therapy. What is your diagnosis?
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.723 | 0.412 |
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".