MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802500581 · doi:10.1002/ca.23184

Another new organ! is this a golden age of discovery in anatomy?

2018· article· en· W2802500581 on OpenAlex
Paul E. Neumann

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Anatomy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOrgan systemMesenteryAnatomyNothingPathologyPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Twice in fifteen months the popular press has published reports of the discovery of a new human organ. The claims that the mesentery and interstitium are organs come from medical practitioners, not from anatomical scientists. Although both of these anatomical entities are important in the functioning of the body, neither satisfies the requirements that an organ be composed of two or more tissues and perform a special function. Also missing in the recent claim that the interstitium, that is, connective tissues with fluid-filled spaces, is an organ, is a statement to that effect in the original research report. Alas, it appears to be much ado about nothing. Clin. Anat. 31:648-649, 2018. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.583
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.303 · 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