MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2741599780

Corrigendum: Hearing impairment is associated with smaller brain volume in aging : [Front. Aging Neurosci, 9, (2017) (2)]. DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2017.00002

2017· erratum· en· W2741599780 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stephanie C. Rigters, D. Bos, R.M. Metselaar, Gennady V. Roshchupkin, Robert J. Baatenburg de Jong, Meike W. Vernooij, André Goedegebure

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Aging Neuroscience · 2017
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoxelPsychologyContrast (vision)Computer scienceAudiologyCognitive psychologyMedicineArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the original article, Roshchupkin et al. (2016) was not cited in the article. The citation has now been inserted in Materials and Methods, subsection Brain MRI Acquisition and Processing, second paragraph and should read: Voxel based morphometry (VBM) was performed according to an optimized VBM protocol (Good et al., 2001) and was previously described (Roshchupkin et al., 2016). FSL software (Smith et al., 2004) was used for VBM data processing, all GM and WM density maps were non-linearly registered to the standard ICBM MNI152 GM and WM template (Montreal Neurological Institute) with a 1 mm × 1 mm × 1 mm voxel resolution. Subsequently, a spatial modulation and smoothing procedure with 3 mm (FWHM 8 mm) isotropic Gaussian kernel were applied to all images. The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. Conflict of Interest Statement The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1060.065

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Aging NeuroscienceSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207