Datasets describing the morphometric evaluation of the adult rat mandible following growth stimulation of the condyle using ultrasound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evaluating morphological changes of the mandible due to the unique role of the condyle in mandibular special growth and remodeling pattern is challenging. This data describes a comprehensive evaluation using new techniques to detect morphological changes of the young adult rat mandibles treated by low intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) comparing to matching controls. Two-dimensional (2D) analysis was performed on digital photographs of the hemi-mandibles using AutoCAD software with high accuracy. The anatomical points which were more determinative and prone to visual illusion were defined with particularity. Selective combination of measurements was done to allow for a thorough morphometric evaluation of the mandible focusing on the condyle and the main direction of condylar and mandibular growth. The procedure was simulated for three-dimensional analysis of virtual models of the hemi-mandibles via Geomagic-Qualify software. In the whole procedures, conditions were strictly standardized to ensure reliability and repeatability. Further Insights, Interpretations and discussions of the present datasets can be find in https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bonr.2021.101122[1].
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".