Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 59-year-old woman underwent a CT pulmonary angiogram, which detected an incidental left breast mass (Figure 1). When she presented for her formal breast assessment appointment, the mass was palpable to the patient. Her mammogram demonstrated a partially obscured mass in the outer breast along the posterior nipple line, which was new compared to her screening mammograms from one year prior (Figure 2). A sonographic correlate consisting of an irregular hypoechoic mass was found (Figure 3). There was no axillary lymphadenopathy. Given the suspicious imaging characteristics, the mass was evaluated as BI-RADS 5, for which US-guided biopsy was performed. Pathology revealed intraductal proliferation composed of benign-appearing tubules and rounded structures with an intraductal cellular proliferation, favored to represent an adenomyoepithelioma. Surgical excision was recommended to confirm the diagnosis and exclude other possible differential diagnoses, including invasive breast malignancy. The patient underwent a preoperative MRI examination, which confirmed the enhancing mass without any additional focus of disease (Figure 4). The patient underwent lumpectomy with pathology showing adenomyoepithelioma with malignant transformation (characterized by increased mitotic activity) and positive margins. The patient completed a re-excision to achieve negative margins. She also underwent a staging CT, which showed no metastatic disease within in the chest, abdomen, or pelvis.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".