Dr. Triantafyllias, <i>et al</i> reply
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have read with great interest the letter of Verhoeven, et al, 1 referring to our recent publication on the diagnostic value of optical spectral transmission (OST) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We intend to conduct further studies, also in cooperation with other centers performing research on OST, in order to examine thoroughly the real effects of these and further patient characteristics (i.e., BMI, age, osteoarthritis). In doing so, we aim to contribute to an improvement of the diagnostic value of OST. As stated in our manuscript, we believe that valid interpretation of OST results presupposes consideration of all possible confounding patient-and disease-associated factors. In fact, the first results , to our knowledge, on the ability of OST to detect changes of inflammatory activity caused by antiinflammatory therapy have been recently presented by our group. 3 Completion of these examinations, which also had been partially postponed due to the pandemic, and communication of the final results are currently ongoing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.024 | 0.031 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".