MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392425897 · doi:10.61872/sdj-2018-11-03

Fototipps: Licht in der dentalen Fotografie

2018· article· de· W4392425897 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandro Devigus, Panaghiotis Bazos, Sascha Hein

Bibliographic record

VenueSWISS DENTAL JOURNAL SSO – Science and Clinical Topics · 2018
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Imaging in Medicine
Canadian institutionsPrivy Council Office
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtGynecologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective lighting is a key factor in achieving a good image, not just in dental photography. A variety of light sources can be used for this. It is important to know the colour quality of the light sources and adjust the camera accordingly. This helps to avoid unwanted alterations in colour. Lighting is crucial to a successful image. It controls not only the lightness or darkness of the image, but also the tone, feel and atmosphere of the picture. Manipulating the light, for example by using special filters, can also be a useful diagnostic tool for treatment.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.451
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4510.247

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.378 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSWISS DENTAL JOURNAL SSO – Science and Clinical TopicsSame topicDigital Imaging in MedicineFrench-language works237,207