MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6889929258 · doi:10.3205/21ebm070

Artificial intelligence for dental image analysis: a guide for authors and reviewers

2021· article· en· W6889929258 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGerman Medical Science (German Research Foundation) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImage manipulationRobustness (evolution)Image (mathematics)Applications of artificial intelligenceImage processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/research question: The number of studies employing artificial intelligence (AI), specifically machine and deep learning, for dental image analysis is growing fast. The majority of studies suffer from limitations in planning, conduct and reporting, resulting in low robustness and applicability.[for full text, please go to the a.m. URL]

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.179
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.179
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0130.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0640.077

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.400 · 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
DomainReporting
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerman Medical Science (German Research Foundation)Same topicDental Radiography and ImagingFrench-language works237,207