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
Pulsed electrical field (PEF) energy is a promising technique for catheter ablation of cardiac arrhythmias. In this article, the key aspects that need to be considered for safe and effective PEF delivery are reviewed, and their impact on clinical feasibility is discussed. The most important benefit of PEF appears to be the ability to kill cells through mechanisms that do not alter stromal proteins, sparing sensitive structures to improve safety, without sacrificing cardiomyocyte ablation efficacy. Many parameters affect PEF treatment outcomes, including pulse intensity, waveform shape, and number of pulses, as well as electrode configuration and geometry. These physical and electrical characteristics must be titrated carefully to balance target tissue effects with collateral implications (muscle contraction, temperature rise, risk of electrical arcing events). It is important to note that any combination of parameters affecting PEF needs to be tested for clinical efficacy and safety. Applying PEF clinically requires knowledge of the fundamentals of this technology to exploit its opportunities and generate viable, durable health improvements for patients.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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