MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3039645652 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.200114

Enthesitis: Myth or Reality?

2020· letter· en· W3039645652 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
George A W Bruyn, Petra Hánová, NATALIE FAITH

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2020
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTendon Structure and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSiegeMedicineTrojanAncient historyMythologyArt historyClassicsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Homer’s Iliad tells the epic story of the Trojan War, a 10-year siege of the city of Troy, conducted by an alliance of Greek kings1. According to Homer, the reason for the Trojan war was the abduction of the most beautiful of women, Helen, by the Trojan prince Paris. Since the excavation works of the German archeologist Heinrich Schliemann, we know that the city indeed existed on the northwestern coast of Turkey. The Iliad gives an account of only the 10th year of the siege, in which the Greek warrior Achilles slays Hector, the commander of the Trojan army, and drags him for 9 days behind his chariot around the city. According to Greek mythology, Achilles was unbeatable, yet vulnerable for a single spot of his body where his mother held him as a baby while dipping him in the river Styx. Following the death of Hector, Paris shot an arrow guided by the god Apollo at Achilles. The arrow struck Achilles right at the enthesis of the tendon in the heel, presumably leaving him defenseless on the battlefield and leading to his death. Homer’s poems clearly illustrate the mechanical vulnerability of the entheses, although the poet could not be aware of the mechanoinflammatory entheseal concepts 2800 years ago. In their report entitled “Entheseal changes in response to age, body mass index, and physical activity: an ultrasound study in healthy … Address correspondence to Dr. G. Bruyn, MC Groep Hospitals, Department of Rheumatology, Lelystad 8333 AA, the Netherlands. E-mail: gawbruyn{at}wxs.nl

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicTendon Structure and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207