MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173447490 · doi:10.1002/jmor.21391

A multimethod approach to the differentiation of enthesis bone microstructure based on soft tissue type

2021· article· en· W3173447490 on OpenAlexafffund
S. Amber Whitebone, A. S. M. Hossain Bari, Marina L. Gavrilova, Jason S. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Morphology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMorphological variations and asymmetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSoft tissueBiologyAnatomyElectron microscopeMicrostructureMorphology (biology)Bone tissueEnthesisPathologyMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringTendonOpticsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whereas there is a wealth of research studying the nature of various soft tissues that attach to bone, comparatively little research focuses on the bone's microscopic properties in the area where these tissues attach. Using scanning electron microscopy to generate a dataset of 1600 images of soft tissue attachment sites, an image classification program with novel convolutional neural network architecture can categorize images of attachment areas by soft tissue type based on observed patterns in microstructure morphology. Using stained histological thin section and liquid crystal cross-polarized microscopy, it is determined that soft tissue type can be quantitatively determined from the microstructure. The primary diagnostic characters are the orientation of collagen fibers and heterogeneity of collagen density throughout the attachment area thickness. These determinations are made across broad taxonomic sampling and multiple skeletal elements.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MorphologySame topicMorphological variations and asymmetryFrench-language works237,207