MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292313829 · doi:10.1080/00085030.2022.2104563

Is the third trochanter of the femur a developmental anomaly, a functional marker, or an evolutionary adaptation?

2022· article· en· W4292313829 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eren Öğüt

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Society of Forensic Science Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFemurGreater trochanterAnatomyAdaptation (eye)Lesser TrochanterBiologyMedicineSurgeryNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The third trochanter (TT) is a proximal femoral accessory tubercle at the upper border of the gluteal tuberosity that is unusually encountered on the posterior aspect. However, detailed knowledge about the TT remains limited. For this reason, TT was investigated in all its aspects. To give an overview about the TT, a review was conducted in databases until November 2021. Out of 4981 articles, only 53 articles could be included, most of which were studies conducted on dry femurs. The TT can be a result of the developmental process of gluteus maximus due to posture and bipedal locomotor activity. Another explanation of the formation of TT is the inactivation, deficiency, or mutation of specific genes that cause alterations in the proximal femoral end. The current review leads to the assumption that TT, considered for all mammalians, can be an evolutionary adaptation and may be a result of altered muscle activity, increased mechanical force, and reduced stress on the femoral shaft. Therefore, TT should be used in genomic studies related to the evolution of mammalians. An improvement in study design, the scale of the study, methodology, and the selection of mammalian species may permit more comprehensive analysis and reduce study heterogeneity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Society of Forensic Science JournalSame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207