Influence of traction therapy of the cervical spine on the distribution of harmonics in the voice as well as the intensity and length of phonation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AMA Świstowski T, Józefczyk A. Influence of traction therapy of the cervical spine on the distribution of harmonics in the voice as well as the intensity and length of phonation. Physiotherapy Review. 2023;27(3):37-46. doi:10.5114/phr.2023.131248. APA Świstowski, T., & Józefczyk, A. (2023). Influence of traction therapy of the cervical spine on the distribution of harmonics in the voice as well as the intensity and length of phonation. Physiotherapy Review, 27(3), 37-46. https://doi.org/10.5114/phr.2023.131248 Chicago Świstowski, Tomasz, and Andrzej Józefczyk. 2023. "Influence of traction therapy of the cervical spine on the distribution of harmonics in the voice as well as the intensity and length of phonation". Physiotherapy Review 27 (3): 37-46. doi:10.5114/phr.2023.131248. Harvard Świstowski, T., and Józefczyk, A. (2023). Influence of traction therapy of the cervical spine on the distribution of harmonics in the voice as well as the intensity and length of phonation. Physiotherapy Review, 27(3), pp.37-46. https://doi.org/10.5114/phr.2023.131248 MLA Świstowski, Tomasz et al. "Influence of traction therapy of the cervical spine on the distribution of harmonics in the voice as well as the intensity and length of phonation." Physiotherapy Review, vol. 27, no. 3, 2023, pp. 37-46. doi:10.5114/phr.2023.131248. Vancouver Świstowski T, Józefczyk A. Influence of traction therapy of the cervical spine on the distribution of harmonics in the voice as well as the intensity and length of phonation. Physiotherapy Review. 2023;27(3):37-46. doi:10.5114/phr.2023.131248.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it