Cephalic Positioning of the Lateral Crura
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To apply a mathematical model to determine the relative effectiveness of various tip-plasty maneuvers while the lateral crura are in cephalic position compared with orthotopic position. A Matlab (MathWorks, Natick, Massachusetts) computer program, called the Tip-Plasty Simulator, was developed to model the medial and lateral crura of the tripod concept in order to estimate the change in projection, rotation, and nasal length yielded by changes in crural length. The following rhinoplasty techniques were modeled in the software program: columellar strut graft/tongue-in-groove, lateral crural steal, lateral crural overlay, medial/intermediate crural overlay, hinge release with alar strut graft, and lateral crural repositioning. Using the Tip-Plasty Simulator, the directionality of the change in projection, rotation, and nasal length produced by the various tip-plasty maneuvers, as shown by our mathematical model, is largely the same as that expected and observed clinically. Notably, cephalically positioned lateral crura affected the results of the rhinoplasty maneuvers studied. By demonstrating a difference in the magnitude of change resulting from various rhinoplasty maneuvers, the results of this study enhance the ability of the rhinoplasty surgeon to predict the effects of various tip-plasty maneuvers, given the variable range in alar cartilage orientation that he or she is likely to encounter.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it