Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tattooing of the skin is an age-old practice that involves delivering pigments to the dermis. Tattoos can be a mark of honour or status in specific cultures, a long-lasting reminder of a moment in time, or more simply a decorative feature of self-expression. Occasionally, tattoos can become painful reminders of moments past, such as a radiation tattoo years after remission from cancer, a lover’s name from a failed relationship or a tattoo from a gang affiliation/imprisonment/human trafficking. On a more mundane note, a tattoo can become out of fashion or individual taste may change over the years. “Tattoo regret” is very common and many patients seek out options to remove tattoos. Though historically, surgical techniques were required to remove tattoos, pigment-targeting lasers have become the first‑line treatment. Successful and safe laser tattoo removal requires a thorough understanding of treatment principles, appropriate laser wavelength selection, relevant biological endpoints, and prognostic factors that may guide the expected number of treatment sessions needed for a satisfactory outcome.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".