Vitamin E discussion forum position paper on the revision of the nomenclature of vitamin E
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This position paper opens a discussion forum of this Journal dedicated to a scientific debate on Vitamin E nomenclature. With this article we provide the scientific and medical communities with what we consider relevant information in favor of revising the nomenclature of vitamin E. To our knowledge, only RRR-α-tocopherol has been medically used to protect against a deficiency disease in humans, and therefore, it would be appropriate to restrict the term vitamin to this molecule. The direct demonstration of a vitamin function to other tocochromanols (including other tocopherols, tocotrienols and eventually tocomonoenols), has not yet been scientifically shown. In fact, the medical prescription of a molecule against the deficiency disease only because it has been included in the "Vitamin E family", but not tested as vitamin E, could lead to ineffective therapy and potentially dangerous consequences for patients. The idea of this revision launched during the recent 3rd Satellite Symposium on Vitamin E of the 2022 SFRR-Europe meeting, offers a open platform of discussion for the scientists involved in vitamin E research and scientific societies interested to this subject.
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 | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
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".