Unveiling the unreal: Comprehensive imaging review of hepatic pseudolesions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hepatic pseudolesions are defined as non-neoplastic focal abnormalities of the liver which can mimic or conceal true liver lesions. It is particularly common in liver due to its unique dual blood supply and the existence of multilevel anastomosis between them. Because of the recent advances in CT and MRI technology, they are being increasingly encountered in daily practice. Broadly they can be categorised in to (1) Focal parenchymal abnormalities like focal fatty change, focal fat sparing, focal confluent fibrosis, segmental hypertrophy and regenerative nodules, (2) Perfusion abnormalities which include transient hepatic parenchymal enhancement in portal vein obstruction, third inflow, intrahepatic shunts, hepatic arterial occlusion and hepatic venous obstruction, (3) Imaging pitfalls like parenchymal compression, unenhanced vessels and pseudolipoma. It is essential for the radiologists to be familiar with the typical and atypical imaging features of pseudolesions to avoid mistaking them for sinister pathologies and also to avoid overlooking underlying hidden pathologies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".