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
INTRODUCTION: Gallbladder duplication is a rare congenital malformation that occurs in about one in 4000 births. Congenital anomalies of the gallbladder and anatomical variations of their positions are associated with an increased risk of complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. PRESENTATION OF CASE: We report the case of a double gallbladder in a fifty-six year old man. He presented with recurrent episodes of biliary colic. Pre-operative imaging confirmed the diagnosis. He subsequently underwent surgery for biliary colic. DISCUSSION: Inspection of the resected gallbladder specimen showed that it consisted of two chambers with a single cystic duct, which communicated through a common ostium. Both chambers had cholelithiasis. There were two cystic arteries as well. Duplication of the gallbladder has an incidence of approximately 1: 4000. However, the exact incidence of this rare anomaly cannot be accurately assessed, since the only cases which have been identified are those that became symptomatic or were encountered as incidental findings during surgery, imaging studies or at autopsy. CONCLUSION: Duplication of the gallbladder is a rare congenital abnormality, which requires special attention to the biliary ductal and arterial anatomy. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiography is the appropriate treatment in a symptomatic gallbladder. The removal of an asymptomatic double gallbladder remains controversial.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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