Ontogenetic changes in functional matrices and facial bone remodeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to the functional matrix hypothesis, changes in size and shape and localization of facial bones during individual ontogeny are influenced by periosteal and capsular matrices. However, the interaction of the functional matrices with the distribution of areas of bone remodeling has not been extensively studied yet. Here we evaluate the changes in the volume of the paranasal sinuses and orbital capsule with age and their association with facial growth arising from bone remodeling patterns of the upper and middle face in a sample of prehistoric human populations from South America. We found an association between capsule size and bone cell proportions, however the trajectories of variation are ambiguous across bones. The frontal and maxillary sinuses had a significant increase from 4.5 up to 14.5 years old, while the orbital capsule had an increase in volume even in adult stages. In turn, the volume of the frontal sinus increases while the bone formation remains relatively stable in subadults and decreases in adults, while the maxilla and the zygomatic bones display a lower proportion of formation when the bones are growing. Our study contributes with information concerning the covariation between bone growth remodeling and the increments of the capsular matrices.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".