MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391681646 · doi:10.1111/vop.13185

Consensus guidelines for nomenclature of companion animal inherited retinal disorders

2024· article· en· W4391681646 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Ophthalmology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsAltasciences (Canada)
FundersNational Eye Institute
KeywordsNomenclatureCompanion animalConsensus conferenceComputer scienceMedicinePathologyBiologyZoologyTaxonomy (biology)Library scienceVeterinary medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Companion animals, namely dogs, cats, and horses, can be affected with many forms of hereditary retinal disease. The number of such diseases characterized in the last decade has increased substantially, and nomenclature is nonstandardized, heterogenous, and confusing. We provide in this viewpoint article consensus guidelines for naming of companion animal hereditary retinal diseases, either prospectively or retrospectively. These consensus guidelines have been developed with the purpose of standardizing nomenclature. We provide examples for the iterative nomenclature process and a comprehensive File S1 on proposed renaming of previously described diseases.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.297 · 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