Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three horses presented with clinical signs ranging from an intermittent cough, swollen neck and in one case suggestive of esophageal obstruction. A complete physical examination, upper airway endoscopy and microbiological examination revealed atypical guttural pouch mycosis in that no artery was associated with the fungal mass. Fungal organisms isolated from these cases were Rhizopus spp, Aspergillus nidulans, Penicillium spp, Mucor spp, Chrysosporium spp, and Alternaria spp. All cases were treated medically by local irrigation on a daily basis using a 0.9% or 1.7% enilconazole. Whilst the most successful treatment for guttural pouch mycosis is surgical occlusion of the artery associated with the fungal mass, the authors suggest that this represents a skewed population including only horses that present for epistaxis. These cases illustrate the importance of routine guttural pouch endoscopy as part of a complete upper airway examination in the horse. Medical management of early gutturomycosis is a tenable alternative to surgery with the caveat that the surgical option must be exercised in cases of epistaxis or fungal mass involving an artery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".