The Ansa Hypoglossi: Quantifying Axonal Density of a Donor Nerve for Facial Reinnervation
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
Background: There are a number of nerve grafting options for facial reanimation and the ansa hypoglossi (AH) may be considered in select situations. Objective: To compare axonal density, area, and diameter of AH with other nerves more usually used for facial reanimation. Methods: AH specimens from patients undergoing neck dissections were submitted in formalin. Proximal to distal cross sections, nerve diameters, and the number of axons per nerve, proximally and distally, were measured and counted. Results: Eighteen nerve specimens were analyzed. The average manual axon count for the distal and proximal nerve sections was 1378 ± 333 and 1506 ± 306, respectively. The average QuPath counts for the proximal and distal nerve sections were 1381 ± 325 and 1470 ± 334, respectively. The mean nerve area of the proximal and distal nerve sections was 0.206 ± 0.01 and 0.22 ± 0.064 mm 2 , respectively. The mean nerve diameter for the proximal and distal nerve sections were 0.498 ± 0.121 and 0.526 ± 0.75 mm, respectively. Conclusion: The histological characteristics of the AH support clinical examination of outcomes as a promising option in facial reanimation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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