Surgical Management Of Canine Oral Tumors.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Five male dogs with age ranging from 5 -9 years, and different breeds viz., Labrador, St. Bernard, Spitz, GSD and Mongrel one each presented to the Department of Surgery and Radiology, CVSc, Rajendranagar, PVNR TVU with a history of difficulty in eating food, after oral examination, tumor mass in the mouth was identified, Oral radiographs did not show clear borders of the mass.Clinically and macroscopically, the mass was painful and had a nodular appearance and was reddish whitein color with varying size of length ranging from 5cm - 12cm and width ranging from 5cm ? 3cm. After surgical resection of the tumor mass, Histopathologic examination of the mass in all dogs revealed that the tumors were of malignant nature, Ameloblastoma (Laborador), Fibrous Histocytoma (St.Bernard), and others Squamous cell carcinoma. Reoccurrence of tumor growth after 30 day to 60 days was noticed. Further surgical resection was taken up to facilitate for easy passage of food while eating. Four dogs died after span of 3-4 months except one mongrel dog survived without any reoccurrence.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.016 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".