Bibliographic record
Abstract
Desde la antigüedad se habló de la diabetes. Se hicieron descripciones aisladas a menudo desconocidas por posteriores investigadores, no relacionaban su hallazgo con la enfermedad y daban explicaciones incorrectas sobre la causa de lo que observaban.Descubrimiento de la insulina La insulina fue descubierta en la ciudad de Toronto en el verano del año 1921, gracias a la tenacidad de un médico que logró el importante hallazgo científico. En 1920, Frederick Banting (1891-1941), en la revista Surgery, Gynecology & Obstetrics encontró un caso autopsiado de Moses Barron sobre litiasis pancreática con atrofia de los acinis y persistencia de los islotes, parecido a lo que se observaba al bloquear por ligaduras un conducto pancreático. Esa noche escribió: “Diabetes. Ligar el conducto pancreático del perro. Mantener los perros vivos hasta que se degeneren sus acinis, quedando los islotes. Tratar de aislar la secreción interna de estos para aliviar la glucosuria”.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".