MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883078744 · doi:10.22374/jclrs.v2isp1.28

Vaulting Corneo-Limbus – A Scleral Lens Bridge Too Far?

2018· article· en· W2883078744 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jan P.G. Bergmanson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Contact lens Research and Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal surgery and disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScleraScleral lensCorneaVault (architecture)Lens (geology)OptometryOphthalmologyGeologyOpticsArtPhysicsMedicineVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The original scleral lenses (SGP), fitted over a hundred years ago, were designed to vault over the cornea and limbus and to land on the conjunctiva over the sclera. Among current SGP practitioners there appears to be a general agreement on the validity of this approach, so the philosophy of the desired SGP fit has not changed in this respect. Yet the SGPs available to practitioners come in sizes typically ranging between 13 and 20 mm in overall diameter. This reality may be interpreted to mean that there is a huge individual variation in the corneo-limbal diameter or that there is a disagreement on what this dimension truly amounts to. The purpose of this article is to establish what it is that we know and what still needs to be determined.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Contact lens Research and ScienceSame topicCorneal surgery and disordersFrench-language works237,207