Comparison of mean total ridge count and mean ATD angle in OSMF and oral Leukoplakia patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Palm prints formed once does not change throughout life and is not influenced by environment. Palmar Dermatoglyphics can indicate the development of potentially malignant and malignant lesions and help in identifying persons at high risk of developing Oral submucous fibrosis (OSMF) and Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSSC). Materials and Methods: Dermatoglyphic patterns were collected from randomly selected 120 patients using 3M™ CSD200i. Single-digit Optical Scanner (3M™, Canada, 2015) with automatic capture mechanism was applied to capture finger prints of all the 10 fingers of patients, who were divided in control and test group with respective subgroups of leukoplakia and OSMF. Mean total ridge count and ATD angle were measured in all patients and comparison was done between control group and patients with OSMF and leukoplakia. Results: The collected data was subjected to analysis using Chi-square test for comparison between the groups. The mean ATD angle in patints with osmf is 43.38, leukoplakia is 43.53, patients without lesion but with habit is 44.78, and patients without habit is 45.65.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".