MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385280403 · doi:10.5114/dr.2023.127713

A novel and simple technique for treatingpigmented follicular cyst

2023· article· en· W4385280403 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Muhammed Mukhtar

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatology Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer and Skin Lesions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFollicular phaseMedicineCystFollicular CystDermatologyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AMA Mukhtar M. A novel and simple technique for treating pigmented follicular cyst. Dermatology Review/Przegląd Dermatologiczny. 2023;110(2):185-186. doi:10.5114/dr.2023.127713. APA Mukhtar, M. (2023). A novel and simple technique for treating pigmented follicular cyst. Dermatology Review/Przegląd Dermatologiczny, 110(2), 185-186. https://doi.org/10.5114/dr.2023.127713 Chicago Mukhtar, Muhammed O. 2023. "A novel and simple technique for treating pigmented follicular cyst". Dermatology Review/Przegląd Dermatologiczny 110 (2): 185-186. doi:10.5114/dr.2023.127713. Harvard Mukhtar, M. (2023). A novel and simple technique for treating pigmented follicular cyst. Dermatology Review/Przegląd Dermatologiczny, 110(2), pp.185-186. https://doi.org/10.5114/dr.2023.127713 MLA Mukhtar, Muhammed O. "A novel and simple technique for treating pigmented follicular cyst." Dermatology Review/Przegląd Dermatologiczny, vol. 110, no. 2, 2023, pp. 185-186. doi:10.5114/dr.2023.127713. Vancouver Mukhtar M. A novel and simple technique for treating pigmented follicular cyst. Dermatology Review/Przegląd Dermatologiczny. 2023;110(2):185-186. doi:10.5114/dr.2023.127713.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.007

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatology ReviewSame topicCancer and Skin LesionsFrench-language works237,207