Agenesis of permanent canines – observation carried out on own material. Clinical aspects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AMA Jarka J, Angerman A. Agenesis of permanent canines – observation carried out on own material. Clinical aspects. Forum Ortodontyczne / Orthodontic Forum. 2023;19(1):7-25. doi:10.5114/for.2023.130175. APA Jarka, J., & Angerman, A. (2023). Agenesis of permanent canines – observation carried out on own material. Clinical aspects. Forum Ortodontyczne / Orthodontic Forum, 19(1), 7-25. https://doi.org/10.5114/for.2023.130175 Chicago Jarka, Jolanta, and Adam Mieczysław Angerman. 2023. "Agenesis of permanent canines – observation carried out on own material. Clinical aspects". Forum Ortodontyczne / Orthodontic Forum 19 (1): 7-25. doi:10.5114/for.2023.130175. Harvard Jarka, J., and Angerman, A. (2023). Agenesis of permanent canines – observation carried out on own material. Clinical aspects. Forum Ortodontyczne / Orthodontic Forum, 19(1), pp.7-25. https://doi.org/10.5114/for.2023.130175 MLA Jarka, Jolanta et al. "Agenesis of permanent canines – observation carried out on own material. Clinical aspects." Forum Ortodontyczne / Orthodontic Forum, vol. 19, no. 1, 2023, pp. 7-25. doi:10.5114/for.2023.130175. Vancouver Jarka J, Angerman A. Agenesis of permanent canines – observation carried out on own material. Clinical aspects. Forum Ortodontyczne / Orthodontic Forum. 2023;19(1):7-25. doi:10.5114/for.2023.130175.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".