Dataset from: Limb development in skeletally-immature large-sized dogs: a radiographic study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dataset from the publication: "Limb development in skeletally-immature large-sized dogs: a radiographic study", published in PLoS ONE, 2021. Despite the extreme morphological variability of the canine species, data on limb development are limited and the time windows for the appearance of the limb ossification centres (OCs) reported in veterinary textbooks, considered universally valid for all dogs, are based on dated studies. The aim of this study was to acquire up-to-date information regarding the arm, forearm and leg bone development in skeletally-immature large-sized dogs from 6 weeks to 16 weeks of age. Nine litters of 5 large-sized breeds (Boxer, German Shepherd, Labrador Retriever, Saarloos Wolfdog, White Swiss Shepherd Dog) were included, for a total of 54 dogs, which were subject to clinical and radiographic examination on a bi-weekly basis. The appearance of 18 limb OCs was recorded and 14 radiographic measurements were performed; their relationship with age and body weight was investigated and any breed differences were analysed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.025 |
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".