MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3147287214 · doi:10.1016/j.xjtc.2021.03.032

Commentary: Aberrant vertebral arteries in aortic repair: Small but mighty!

2021· editorial· en· W3147287214 on OpenAlexaff
Marina Ibrahim, Jennifer Chung, Thomas F. Lindsay, Maral Ouzounian

Bibliographic record

VenueJTCVS Techniques · 2021
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAortic archVertebral arteryAortaAnatomyThoracic aortaAneurysmSubclavian arteryRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aberrant origin of the vertebral artery (VA) is an uncommon anatomic variant. The VA originates as the first branch of the ipsilateral subclavian artery. Its aberrant origin is variable and can arise from the aortic arch, common, or internal or external carotid arteries.1,2 Despite being clinically asymptomatic, knowledge of the precise origin of aberrant VA can be critical before performing open surgical or endovascular procedures involving the arch or distal aorta.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0420.040
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.010

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJTCVS TechniquesSame topicAortic Disease and Treatment ApproachesFrench-language works237,207